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

"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."

I shudder for the future of Catholics when I read that. Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images. Giving what belongs to God to Mary is not going to turn out well for Catholics.

For the LORD God is a sun and shield: the LORD will give grace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.

17 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. 7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. 9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. 10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. 11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. 12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. 13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. 26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

“I have told you repeatedly that I don’t wear a ring.”

You sure have, and yet I don’t ask you if you do. I asked if you DID. I bet you know the difference between present tense and past tense. Why do you keep saying “now” or “don’t” when the answer is about the past?

“I have shown you where the the brides attendants are spoken of in scripture as well and the grooms attendants.”

No. You showed me something else that you passed off as what I was talking about. I already pointed out that they are not the same thing - as shown by their different roles.

You've gone ahead and said it. Now SHOW that Phil actually USED any tradition in talking with the eunuch.

Happy to oblige.

Apostolic tradition, or succession by definition, is the faith handed down from the Apostles, who in turn, received it from Jesus himself. Ergo, any missionary activity undertaken by the Apostles, was as a result of the commission which they received from Jesus. That is the essence of Apostolic tradition. "Tradition" is not the preaching of a gospel which finds no basis in Scripture or which somehow, over the years, became an item of popular culture like the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade. It is the unbroken episcopal lineage which traces itself back to the Apostles and through them, to Jesus.

Philip, being one of the original 12 Apostles, stands at the very heart of that Apostolic tradition. His preaching to the eunuch stands as an excellent example of it.

At various points in history, that episcopal lineage has been ruptured due to disagreements over theology, pastoral practice, scandal and various other issues. As a result, new theologies have been proposed and preached, often using Scripture as their basis but proposed in a manner divorced from the successors of the Apostles.

In summary, the tradition used by Philip, was the tradition of Jesus Himself and imparted to the Apostles at Pentecost through the Holy Spirit.

"The thought of the loss of so many souls is the

cause of my sadness."

To give an example... a credible report of a weeping statue occurred in 1972, with the world-famous International Pilgrim Virgin of Fatima (left) that was witnessed by large crowds to weep human tears in Louisiana. A few years later in 1978, the same statue again wept... but in the second occurrence, it did so in Las Vegas, Nevada. How significant that this statue - a tangible representative of the Fatima Message of Conversion, Prayer, and Sacrifice - has traveled the entire United States only to weep so copiously in two areas in our country that are well-known for unrestrained hedonism. New Orleans and its notorious Mardi Gras is in Louisiana, and we all know that Las Vegas capitalizes on the fact that it's popularly nicknamed the "Sin City". The locations in these two separate cases involving this miraculous statue were definitely prophetic factors as to why Our Lady shed tears.

In regards to the type of tears, the sight of a statue weeping normal, watery tears must be impressive enough and effectively conveys a sense of sadness, and perhaps even frustration... but to see bright red blood streaming from a statue's eyes must be downright upsetting and probably a little frightening. Surely, bloody tears bear a much greater weight compared to normal tears... and I believe they express something much more serious - a terrible pain in Our Lady's Immaculate Heart caused by the fact that she knows what self-imposed chastisements are headed our way, but hardly anyone is paying her messages - or more importantly, her Divine Son - any serious attention. This brings to mind what was shared with me over a decade ago by an elderly lady-friend from the island of Maui (now deceased) who was a reputed mystic/visionary. Her name was "Christina" and we became quite close friends, and I personally believed she was the real deal.

The oil-weeping icon of Our Lady of Soufanieh in Syria. Countless cures
have been attributed to the oil from this Church-approved miracle.

Weeping Rosa Mystica statues from around the globe. They are the most

prolific weeping images reported in the world today.

http://guadalupehousehi.blogspot.com/2012_11_01_archive.html

I made no attempts at damage control.

No. I was right - all along.

That is simply insolent denial, for all to see. You were wrong that this was misrepresenting Kenrick;

wrong about hiding what Kenrick was arguing, esp. since you have quoted Luther without even proving the source or a link to what he was arguing;

and thus wrong to presume the source did not know what Kenrick was arguing;

and wrong that Kenrick assenting in the end to the decree of V1 on PI Kenrick refutes my statement that what would be misrepresenting Kenrick would be to invoke him as one who always supported the infallible Roman papacy as V1 declared it,

and wrong to make his denial of Protestant belief the issue,

and wrong to impugn citing a source as an ally to their views when that same source doesn’t believe what the author believes, as you yourself have done.

All you got right was that Kenrick was misspelled once, as if that supported not knowing he supported Peter as rock, but which is another example of you focusing on a molehill in avoiding the mountain that refutes an RC argument.

And which attempts are the equivalent of what the RM calls spitwads, thrown by those who throw have no ammunition against educated, articulate, reasoning posters, and thus it is time that his advice should be heeded

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.

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."

#352

HMMMmmm...

You are all-powerful with your Divine Son.

God is our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble.