Posted on 12/14/2011 10:41:59 AM PST by Alex Murphy
Amid the hubbub surrounding the Gingrich surge, this is one question that has perplexed commentators of all religious and political persuasions. There’s no consensus about where to find the Catholic in Newt.
At this point, the question is not where it is exactly, but where to begin looking.
So, let’s review speculation about the Catholicity of Newt Gingrich. I’ll also advance my own hypothesis and give it a professorial flourish by using a suitably big word.
Hypothesis number one: The new Catholic Newt is simply being American.
Playfully characterizing Gingrich as a “religious flip-flopper” draws attention to how Gingrich, like many other Americans, has seemingly changed his religion to suit prevailing fashion. Perhaps there’s also an ironic part to this interpretation in that Gingrich has supposedly made use of the religious market place to embrace a religion that would take umbrage if treated as a “commodity.”
It might be reasonable enough to see Gingrich’s Catholicity as a kind of epiphenomenon reflecting American cultural propensities--after all, Newt is indeed American. But conversion as “flip-flop” seems to preclude understanding conversion as a turn toward something; it’s not just a lurching back and forth from one view to another. It also makes the Catholic in Newt hard to locate.
Hypothesis number two: Professor Newton Leroy Gingrich has recognized Catholicism’s intellectual appeal.
Reading oneself into Catholicism has a long and venerable history. For some generations, it was Karl Adam’s The Spirit of Catholicism or Ronald Knox’s The Belief of Catholics that opened up a new intellectual vista. For later generations, it was Thomas Merton’s The Seven Storey Mountain or Malcolm Muggeridge’s Something Beautiful for God that made Catholic spirituality accessible and real.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Jesuits seem to me to be among the more liberal Catholics, while Dominicans tend to be fairly conservative.
A flawed one. Just like everybody else. Just like everyone else who’s a Christian. Just like everyone, period. My problems with him, as with every other candidate in the declared field, stem from grounds other than where he goes to church.
And Chris Buckley is, for far more reasons than that column, a creep and a human secretion stain on the conservative movement (I’ll leave to you what kind of secretion, but rest assured it’s from below the waistline, sunshine).
I judged your actions, not your eternal salvation.
Different things, aren’t they?
CINO?
Where? You have to provide evidence.
Ahhhh......well my (and perhaps Newt's) spirituality is a little different.
I believe that my own miserable spiritual condition (and not Newt's) should be the primary focus of my disgust at the fallen human condition.
Of course, if one is already a member of the "elect"..........
Read the post. It’s all official Catholic doctrine and reiterated by a number of popes.
Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.
As I said earlier, some Protestants may indeed be saved. It will be because they are, however imperfectly, "in" the Church.
So all of your citations are irrelevant.
Hummm judging is judging...
If one is saved, they understand that they are sinners in need of salvation..that they did nothing and can do nothing to earn the merits of God..
The fact that Christ chose to save me says nothing of me, nothing of my church.. nothing of my doctrine.. it is all about Him and his mercy and grace..
Psa 68:20 [He that is] our God [is] the God of salvation........
I am not ashamed that God chose to save me, that I can not find favor with Him by my works or actions..
Jhn 5:21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth [them]; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.
What of repentance? Are you saved without repenting? Born saved no matter what?
It seems Christ is way more open minded than you are about doctrine.
Maybe He chose some Calvinists even though they are spectacularly wrong?
Perhaps I'm not understanding the word "saved".
If I understand this theology correctly, if one is saved, one is not "in need of salvation" (as you put it). No, one is already saved, yes? Done deal, ticket punched, seat in the choir celestial confirmed etc etc.
That's an important distinction which should not be glossed over. See in post #33, you divide mankind into two broad groups; the "saved" and the "unsaved". Newt, apparently, is a member of the latter along with most Catholics, if I understand your post correctly. You (correct me if I'm wrong) are a member of the former.
One who is unsaved is damned and therefore predestined for hell. Am I right? If so, this leads inevitably to a world view in which there are two broad groups of people; "the elect" destined for eternal glory and the pitiable wretches like Newt predestined for eternal fire. In this situation, it becomes very easy to repeat the prayer of the Pharisee in Luke, Ch 18......"Lord I thank you that I am not like other people, thieves, rogues adulterers......." which is exactly the impression that your post #33 conveyed, intended or not.
This is a very dangerous road to go down........
Interesting thought. It’s not like he’s a complete stranger to Catholicism.
Over the long run, it’d probably depend on whether he showed he was serious about it, or whether he just did it so he could pull college-age girlfriends with white blouses and plaid skirts in their closets.
Hebrews 13:17 Obey your prelates and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls: that they may do this with joy and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you.
Naturally, those who already have their own personal interpretation of Scripture and rely on the canon selected for them by the Pharisees rather than the Christian canon tend to reinterpret the above verse to suit their own preferences. The very last thing most individuals who play Christian but don't live Christian want to have to do us pick up their cross and follow Christ. And, as we saw with Eve, the toughest thing to let go of and surrender to Christ is your own personal rewriting of Scripture to suit yourself.
have a nice day
BWAHAHAHAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!
Boy, are SOME PEOPLE gonna be surprised when they find a great big GOAT sign on their back, down in hell!!
Well you’ve said the same to me and so have the other harpies who hang out here. Look at RunnyMom’s post that above about “a saved man would never become a Catholic” = what’s that supposed to mean?
Nice of you to tell us all you’re saved. Otherwise there’s no way anyone could tell.
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.