Apologists Concerned About Rick Warren's Alignment With 'Holy Father'

Charisma News ^ | 12/3/14 | Mark Andrews

[marshmallow]

"Christian unity" is one of those terms that stir up a whole spectrum of—sometimes emotional—opinions.

On the one hand, we know that Jesus prayed to the Father concerning future believers "that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you" (John 17:21a, NIV).

On the other hand, charismatics know it is almost pointless to discuss the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12, 14) with Baptists or most anyone else from a mainline denomination. And Protestants of just about any stripe get riled up when they hear Catholics talking about papal infallibility or their adoration of the Virgin Mary.

It's on this latter point that Rick Warren, senior pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, and successful author, has waded into a hornet's nest of controversy by telling a Catholic News Service interviewer that Protestants and Catholics "have far more in common than what divides us" and that Catholics do not "worship Mary like she's another god."

Regarding Warren's view that Catholics do not worship Mary, Matt Slick, writing on the website of the Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry, goes into great detail with material from Roman Catholic sources that say Mary is "the all holy one," is to be prayed to, worshipped, that she "brings us the gifts of eternal life" and she "made atonement for the sins of man."

If that's not putting her in the place of Christ as a god-like figure to be worshipped, then what is it?

"We believe in Trinity, the Bible, the resurrection, and that salvation is through Jesus Christ. These are the big issues," Warren says. "But the most important thing is if you love Jesus, we're on the same team."

To Warren's point about being on the same team, Slick.....

[nicmarlo]

Was that accusation of his trying to prove some kind of ‘point’? It escapes me that any rational point was being made.

[MamaB]

Each person has to do that on his/her own. No one else can do it for them.

[CynicalBear]

I find it interesting that Catholics scoff at the idea of a personal saviour but will readily explain the we will each individually stand before the judgement throne. They ignore phrases like “Christ in you” which is rather personal. Your name written in the book of life would be rather personal.

[terycarl]

And if someone believes that Scripture were written by the Holy Spirit, then there IS problem with *editing* it. You know better than to mess with it. A believer would never do that.

of good grief...ALL the scriptures were written by man...The Holy Spirit has terrible handwriting so He chose people like Peter, Paul, James, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John...et al. to do the actual physical work. He, of course inspired them as to what to write down but choosing the Catholic church to do His grunt work is what allows us to have and enjoy the Bible today....He inspired....Catholics wrote.

[MamaB]

I have no idea but he needs lots of prayers. I do not associate with people like him and would be scared to be in his area. What else does he think?

[JPX2011]

Dude....you really need to take a course in logic.

Been there. Done that. Which is how I know the following:

You're implication, and a weak one at that, is that catholic gals aren't having abortions.

Is not an implication of mine, but an inference of yours. Logic.

You clean up your garden and then come to everyone else.

My garden is the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Which has already spoken correctly on these matters. Can you say the same for yours? If you even have one.

[metmom]

What the heck is the “Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction”?

I can find all kinds of websites which address it but there’s really no information about it from anything reputable.

Is it some kind of urban legend thing, or for real or what?

[JPX2011]

You do not know one thing about Protestants if you even consider we back abortion.

As a protestant do you allow for the use of abortifacients where a conceived child is denied implantation?

Y’all seem to be doing that all on your own with people like Kennedy, Pelosi, etc. Set your own group straight before being critical of any other.

They have been set straight. But, like the protestant, they think they know better. They will be judged, just as the protestant will be judged.

[terycarl]

AhHA! You are quite learned in Latin then!!

well...I was an Altar Boy....et cum spiritu tuo..

Actually I said that I Accepted the translation from the vulgate...I didn't say that I translated it

[MamaB]

I was wondering the same thing. What is it?

[CynicalBear]

I love hearing stories like that.

[metmom]

*less than perfect*?

Is that how you brush off the sins of those who are supposed to be Christ’s vicar on earth?

Demonic is more like it.

And if you note, those lists don’t agree. Which means there were far more than 10 popes with sordid histories.

Ok, now where is the list of the 10 best popes from Catholics?

We never see that. All we get is a hand-waving dismissal of the bad ones.

[metmom]

Christ dwelling in our hearts by faith makes it REALLY personal.

[Springfield Reformer]

Whether Nestorius taught anything contrary to a fully orthodox view of the incarnation as understood by Chalcedon is a subject of vigorous debate.  There is explicit evidence, for example, that he did not oppose, in principle, the term "God-bearer" (theotokus), but he worried that if presented unqualified it would lead to wrong conclusions:

Seemingly oblivious to the trouble brewing, Nestorius wrote a third time to Celestinein November, saying he was not opposed to the use of Theotokos, “unless it should advance to the confusion of natures in the manner of the madness of Apollinaris or Arius.Nonetheless, I have no doubt that the term Theotokos is inferior to the term Christotokos” (DelCogliano 2005). It is clear from this and other comments of Nestorius that he was not entirely opposed to the use of Theotokos, but “he refuses to use it by itself, as Cyril constantly did, without adequate qualification” (Anastos 1962, 122).

See: http://www.academia.edu/2248412/Nestorius_did_not_intend_to_argue_that_Christ_had_a_dual_nature_but_that_view_became_labeled_Nestorianism_PRO_

In fact, the above article makes a good case that the accusations against Nestorius were based largely on terminological confusion rooted in Greek ontology, that Nestorius was in fact fully orthodox, even up to the measure of Chalcedon.  Nestorius' view preserved both the unity of Jesus as a person, thus human will, intellect, soul, but also provided for avoiding confusion of the two natures, a critical component of the Chalcedon formulation, thus making it possible and reasonable to discuss Mary as standing in a generative relationship to Jesus but not to God.

If you peel back the polemic intensity we all experience on these pages, I think you will find it is this Chalcedonian aversion to confusion of the two natures that drives the objection to the expression "Mother of God."  Which expression of course was and is one possible way to understand "theotokus," but more compatible with sound doctrine is to render it as "God-bearer." By this means we can avoid the confusion that results when Mary seems by words to be placed in a generative relationship to God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, through an unwholesome lumping together of all the persons under the heading of "God," without, as Nestorius would implore us, adding helpful qualifications.

Peace,

SR

[metmom]

I’m not sure.

Seems to me that I recall someone referring to it quite some years ago, but I don’t recall much about it.

[CynicalBear]

>>got any naughty presidents that we can condemn the entire country for??<<

I didn't realize any of them claim to be Christ's representative on earth.

[terycarl]

he's Jesus adopted FATHER.......never mind that nonsense call no one father... Oh? Just WHO adopted him?

why are you so confused....Joseph " adopted" Jesus....he was not His sire, he was His adopting father....didn't you read the Nativity story????

[CynicalBear]

>>.He inspired....Catholics wrote<<

How interesting. Not once in scripture are they called Catholics. The first time the word was used was long after John had died.

[terycarl]

Your redundant list covers a few people who didn't do a real good job... Have you ever considered taking the job of explaining Obama words/actions/policies to the folks in the press room?

no I haven't, but by the same token, I haven't denied my citizenship in the U.S. because Obama is a jackass.

[nicmarlo]

I find it interesting that Catholics scoff at the idea of a personal saviour but will readily explain the we will each individually stand before the judgement throne.

Jesus said I won't be standing before any White Throne Judgment, that is for the unbelievers, those who did not accept Christ as their Savior.

As for me, I am born again, and Christ promised me I am no longer condemned:

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but He that believeth not is condemned already, because He hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. * * * 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

GOD would not PRESUME to FORCE anyone to go to heaven by making them accept Christ as their Savior, as Christ told Nicodemus, John 3:

3 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:

2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

If any man would be able to enter the kingdom of God based on works, it would have been the Pharisees, as they kept the Laws of Moses, they were the righteous according to works. But even Jesus told Nicodemus he must CHOOSE to be born again.