Friday, September 20, 2013

Rome in politics


16 comments:

Ken said...

Indeed.

That is a glaring hypocrisy of the RCC and one of the massive inconsistencies of the Roman Catholic Church and its claim to be able to solve problems with infallible authority. Why don't they exercise their church authority? (Matthew 16; Matthew 18:15-20; John 20:23 - failure to do the binding and loosing shows they really don't have the power of binding and loosing. Why is the suppossed infallible Pope afraid to actually exercise his authority?

Seems like a glaring inconsistency and hypocrisy from the organization that claims to be the only true church that Jesus founded and is able to solve disunity and church problems and interpretation differences.

All the annulments they have issued to people like the Kennedy's is also another example of this.

Lothar Lorraine said...

Hello, I've several questions.


Does someone like myself believing that abortion is wrong (so long the well being of the mother is not threatened) but opposing any prohibition due to its utter uselessness and detrimental effects an "abortionist"?

And were the soldiers led by Joshua having killed babies and pregnant women alike "abortionists"?


I would be glad to learn you answers to these two questions.


Friendly greetings from Europe.

Lothars Sohn – Lothar’s son

http://lotharlorraine.wordpress.com

James Swan said...

Only rarely have I met a serious Roman Catholic in person. Most of the RC's I know or come in contact with are indistinguishable from your average heathen.

Well, as long as they were baptized and get infused with grace occasionally by Eucharist, etc., they should at least make it to purgatory.

Eat, drink, and be merry, for we'll at least make it to purgatory.

Pete Holter said...

“But, again, while [the uninstructed] is being furnished against these (adversaries), whose perverse multitudes fill the churches so far as bodily presence is concerned, the precepts of a Christian and honorable manner of life should also be briefly and befittingly detailed at the same time, to the intent that he may neither allow himself to be easily led astray in this way, by any who are drunkards, covetous, fraudulent, gamesters, adulterers, fornicators, lovers of public spectacles, wearers of unholy charms, sorcerers, astrologers, or diviners practicing any sort of vain and wicked arts, and all other parties of a similar character; nor to let himself fancy that any such course may be followed with impunity on his part, simply because he sees many who are called Christians loving these things, and engaging themselves with them, and defending them, and recommending them, and actually persuading others to their use. For as to the end which is appointed for those who persist in such a mode of life, and as to the method in which they are to be borne with in the church itself, out of which they are destined to be separated in the end,—these are subjects in which the learner ought to be instructed by means of the testimonies of the divine books. He should also, however, be informed beforehand that he will find in the church many good Christians, most genuine citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, if he sets about being such himself” (Saint Augustine, On the Catechizing of the Uninstructed, Ch. 7:11).

With love in Christ,
Pete

Rhology said...

Lothar,

If you don't think abortion should be illegal and unthinkable in the culture and society, you are part of the problem and need to repent. God puts far more value on human life than you seem to.

Abortion is murder, the unjustified taking of human life. What Joshua et al did was JUSTIFIED taking of human life, since God commanded them to do it. So no, they were not abortionists. Far from it.

Peace,
Rhology

Rhology said...

as to the method in which they are to be borne with in the church itself, out of which they are destined to be separated in the end,—these are subjects in which the learner ought to be instructed by means of the testimonies of the divine books

It just so happens that the divine books say you're supposed to excommunicate the unrepentant within the church who claim to be brethren.

Pete Holter said...

It just so happens that the divine books say you're supposed to excommunicate the unrepentant within the church who claim to be brethren.

Yes, but what is the person who doesn’t have that authority or ability, like myself, supposed to do? This is Augustine’s point. You know, although you may have forgotten, that I sent an email to Pelosi’s bishop, asking him to do something. And I wrote to him a second time after you expressed your disappointment that I hadn’t done more. But when you keep your vigor and indignation on the outside of the Church, it makes both of us weaker. If you were to reconcile with the Church of Christ—and for the sake of unity to bear the cross that Lot bore, who was “greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked” (2 Peter 2:7)—our witness would reach much farther.

With love in Christ,
Pete

Rhology said...

Yes, but what is the person who doesn’t have that authority or ability, like myself, supposed to do?

Agitate ceaselessly for reform, if you truly love your church like you claim to.


You know, although you may have forgotten, that I sent an email to Pelosi’s bishop, asking him to do something. And I wrote to him a second time after you expressed your disappointment that I hadn’t done more

You sent a letter?
I mean, that's clearly more than the vast majority do, but whoopie.
Let's be clear - the bishop who did not excomm Pelosi is in sin. That means that someone in significant leadership in your church is in sin, and that matters for you and every Roman Catholic. Why aren't you doing something about it?
Moreover, why isn't your leadership doing something about it? The fact that they're not speaks volumes about the RCC, and if your view weren't so blinkered by your idolatrous "Rome is always right"-ist glasses, you'd know that your job is to work for its reform or leave it.
So far you've chosen neither, and I fear for your soul.


But when you keep your vigor and indignation on the outside of the Church, it makes both of us weaker.

That's a mere assertion. If you would be more biblically-minded, you'd know that there are many churches out there that hold to the SCripture (Rome not being one of them by the way).


If you were to reconcile with the Church of Christ

Let Rome repent of her many sins and I'd be happy to. Until then, I'll call attention to the sin that needs to be repented of. YOu apparently will stay within the decrepit bosom for some sinful reason.

Come out from there and be separate, Pete.


Pete Holter said...

Hi Rhology!

Your exhortation for me to forsake the Church is the call of the Donatists, not the call of Christ. They too pointed to the sins of others to get Christians to forsake the unity that Christ has called us to. Don’t let it happen to us!

I live in Maryland. Pelosi’s bishop lives in San Francisco. I have 4 boys to care for and a number of other pressing concerns to attend to in my life.

I have people within my extended family who have committed abortion. I’ve invited the one who is unrepentant to seek God’s forgiveness. I’ve been to marches. I’ve prayed in front of clinics. I’ve supported Priests for Life, whose adamancy I know you respect. I speak like a madman. But unlike Paul, there is more that I could do. I do play videogames with the boys when I could be doing something more to advance the kingdom.

I will stay with the Church of Christ, not for sin, but because love binds everything together in perfect harmony, and I want to die in love with Jesus. I need to be able to look back in history and see the Church with which I commune lest the promises of Christ be shown to have failed. When I looked back to the time of Augustine, I did not find the Reformed Baptists and those with whom they would commune. I found the Catholic Church.

With love in Christ,
Pete

Rhology said...

Your exhortation for me to forsake the Church is the call of the Donatists

Since Rome is not The Church, it's the call of the Gospel. YOu're very deceived.


They too pointed to the sins of others to get Christians to forsake the unity that Christ has called us to.

You don't have unity. You are covering up sin with false unity. The Bible calls us to expose evil so that it may be repented of. You're perpetuating the Roman dream world.


I’ve prayed in front of clinics

Thus disobeying Jesus b/c
1) Jesus said you're supposed to pray in private
2) you didn't share the Gospel with people there
3) you probably prayed to a dead person.


I’ve supported Priests for Life, whose adamancy I know you respect

Only in part, for they are incrementalists through and through.


When I looked back to the time of Augustine, I did not find the Reformed Baptists and those with whom they would commune. I found the Catholic Church.

You didn't find the ROMAN Catholic Church though.

Pete Holter said...

Hi Rhology!

I think that you are missing Jesus’ point about public prayer. Jesus prayed in public in John 11:41-42 specifically in order to be heard by others, but not for the same reason that the hypocrites publically prayed and for which Jesus condemned them.

I actually did find the Roman Catholic Church in the visible communion of Churches embraced by Augustine.

With love in Christ,
Pete

Rhology said...

Jesus prayed in public

To the Father. Not Abraham or Moses or Michael.

And John 11:41-42 doesn't say Jesus prayed out loud.

Pete Holter said...

“John 11:41-42 doesn't say Jesus prayed out loud.”

Hi Rhology!

I’m not sure how it could be read otherwise. Jesus prayed the prayer so that “the people standing around” would hear Him speaking to His Father and come to believe that the Father had sent Him. It doesn’t mean that you have to become Catholic. Although I hope you will. :)

In Christ,
Pete

Rhology said...

41 So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 42 I knew that You always hear Me; but because of the people standing around I said it, so that they may believe that You sent Me.”

The people standing around were not intended to hear the prayer, but the proclamation that He intended to raise Lazarus.

Rhology said...

Besides all that, praying out in public does little good. Proclaim the true Gospel in public.

(For you, that's step 2. Step 1 is Learn and believe the true Gospel, and repent of your idolatry.)

Pete Holter said...

“The people standing around were not intended to hear the prayer, but the proclamation that He intended to raise Lazarus.”

Most often, to say something is to say it out loud. If His prayer were a private one between Him and His Father, the text would most likely qualify it to say that He had said this within Himself or in His heart or in His thoughts or quietly. Rather, He said to His father, “I thank You that You have heard Me.” This thanksgiving is precisely what he wanted the others to hear, for just after saying this He says that “I knew that You always hear Me, but I said this on account of the people standing around.” He “said this” for the benefit of the people standing around. Said what? Said everything, but more precisely this: “I thank You that You have heard Me.” He wants the people to hear this so that they will connect what He does in raising Lazarus from the dead with Who He is in relationship with His Father.

I would also hold the prayer of John 12:28 to have been said in public: “Father, glorify Your Name.” And Luke 23:34: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” And to do away with what might be ambiguous, He prayed Psalm 22 from the cross, “with a loud voice” (Mark 15:34; Matthew 27:46). And again, “calling out with a loud voice,” He “said, ‘Father, into Your hands I commit my spirit!’ ” (Luke 23:46)

“Besides all that, praying out in public does little good. Proclaim the true Gospel in public.”

I wouldn’t stand behind the first sentence, but you are free to it. I encourage you to become all things to all people in order that you might save some.

With love in Christ,
Pete