Posted on 07/18/2010 6:04:05 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
FIRST coffee. THEN internet. It's a sequencing thing ....
Here's how I meant to end my post to you, dear ROE:
From today's Morning Prayer:
Ephesians 4:29-32
Never let evil talk pass your lips; say only the good things men need to hear, things that will really help them. Do nothing that will sadden the Holy Spirit with whom you were sealed against the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, all passion and anger, harsh words, slander, and malice of every kind. In place of these, be kind to one another, compassionate, and mutually forgiving, just as God has forgiven you in Christ.
I think I know what ->I'm<- going to be confessing tomorrow ...
What you will never see within the cloud of multicolored vomit is any substantiation of his positions. All you will get is poorly constructed and worded insults, wrapped in clumsy and archaic cliches.
What is being argued here isn't "why not more?", but rather "why not all of it?" There's a general belief among Catholics notion that they're hearing the whole Bible at Mass, and they don't need to read (the rest of) the Bible for themselves.
Above all else, here's the valid reason for asking "why not more" Bible reading:
"...from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.The Catholic Church has failed you in that regard. What conclusion should be made, after learning that the Catholic Mass promotes no more than 27.5% of Holy Scripture, and reading layperson claims that hearing 27.5% of Holy Scripture in Mass (or 12.7%, for those who just attend weekly Mass) is enough teaching, training, reproof, correction, wisdom, equipment and righteousness for them?
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."
-- 2 Timothy 3:15-17
You’re using logical reasoning there. It won’t work with these folks. They’re immune to it. They’re driven by an irrational animus against all things Catholic.
I would be happy to see a reasonable non-Catholic discuss these issues of theology and Scripture in a measured and respectful way on this thread, but I’m not holding out much hope. Unfortunately, under the “open thread” rules in effect, anyone can come here anonymously and hurl all sorts of vile ephithets at Catholics, as long as they don’t “get personal” with an individual poster.
That’s the way it is, I suppose. I wouldn’t be surprised to come back here in ten years and find the same individuals here all day long posting the same bigoted remarks, and the gentleman with the colors and the giant letters cheering them on.
Oh, well...It’s in God’s hands.
Always interesting to meet somebody who knows God's timetable, or thinks he does.
The crypto-Gnostic notion that everything was given and worked out to the minutest degree before the closing of the canon leads to the misconception that there was nothing left to unfold.
But a millennium and a half pass and then, suddenly Luther says this, Calvin that, Zwingli something else, Arminius something else again, and then after there was silence for the space of a half hour -- or maybe a few hundred years -- Darby and Scofield unpack the distillation of all truth less than 200 years ago.
All these hundreds of years for the Scofield Baptists to surface (from the strangely undocumented continual existence from the time that Jesus came to the Jordan) while the Catholic Church is derogated for being dilatory in articulating the Trinity.
It's a tough sell.
Well, bring 'em.
As long as we bear in mind that mocking and refuting (not to mention refudiating) are not the same thing.
If you had been granted eyes to see and ears to hear, you would recognize her words as the kindest, most loving encouragement you could have been offered. She is attempting to nudge you out of the dark morass of the self-aggrandizing cult of Rome and into the light of Christ, alone. Of course that would be if God willed. And, thanks, I am having a terrific day.
Actually, the anti-Catholics are making me a better Catholic because they have caused me to refresh my prayers, readings, meditations and positions in the context of their attacks, rechecking fact and context. Not once has my Church or faith failed me. Aside from an occasional anger issue it has been a very Catholic experience.
As has been documented, Darby and Scofield were Johnny-come-lately to those truths.
Of course. Of course.
LOL.
I haven’t been around many Jr High kids in years . . . though there are a couple at my current church who’d be able to manage the task.
ROTFL!
Psychologists do tend to be an eclectic/eccentric sort, in my experience. And the idea that many mental health practitioners have a personal background with mental health issues was shared with me by a number of mental health practitioners. Its a fairly “open secret” among their ranks.
I wait (so far, in vain) for a decent-minded Protestant to rebuke an outburst like that. Protestants' failure to rebuke such stuff reflects very poorly on protestantism in general,
Truly, it is, at the very best, an error to SUBSTITUTE anything or anyone for Christ. However, I think your side does not understand what it means to be "in Christ," and confuses those who, "in Christ" share His mediating work, with substitution.
And, of course, in doing so, you have to pick your way carefully around the injunctions to pray for others and the observation that the prayers of the righteous "avail much."
The exigent, legalistic, works-centered Catholic Church tends to think that those of careless mind may still be forgiven by a God who graciously takes their misdirected devotions as better than the devotees intended.
At the same time, the loving, generous, faith-based non-Catholics call down fire and destruction on the simple who do not think or pray with the anxious precision and fearful precaution required to escape the wrath of the God proposed by those who insist that works are worthless.
"Only God saves, by His loving grace, you'd better make sure you don't goof in your prayers so he doesn't mash you like a bug."
Interesting message.
Integral to this 'animus' is the exaggeration of the idea of total depravity (which, rightly understood, is a fine notion, but wrongly understood is Manichean and gnostic) to the point that reason is considered too weak to perceive anything of value.
So while our discussion partners will use the forms and patterns of reason to make their points and rebut our arguments, when they meet with a successful "refudiation," (Bless Sarah Palin for this word!), suddenly it's "human understanding" and fallen and depraved.
If they confined themselves to mantic and ecstatic utterances, that would be one thing, but since they use (or attempt to use) reason right up to the point where they are overthrown by it, and THEN claim reason itself to be depraved we know something ain't right here.
Anti-[pick a belief] are often most comfortable in the town square format of "open" RF threads where their anti beliefs can be aired openly. And those who are offended by them are often most comfortable in the "caucus" "ecumenical" "prayer" or "devotional" RF threads.
The key for an RF poster is to find his own niche and IGNORE all the others so he doesn't torment himself and become a trouble-maker to others.
For example, the "antis" should IGNORE the caucus threads of whatever beliefs they oppose. And the thin skinned should IGNORE the open threads. Don't read them, don't post to them.
Thanks for your thoughtful, reasonable points.
I think I’ll stop there, for now.
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODNESSSSSSSSSSSSS!
Sounds like you are suggesting
more than a little operation of the
fruit of Holy Spirit . . .
“SELF-CONTROL!”
GASP!
What a shocking Rel Forum scandal THAT would bring!
/s
LOL.
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.