Posted on 09/06/2009 3:50:15 PM PDT by NYer
And in a big way. A lot of you have seen the great ads produced by a group called Catholics Come Home. The ads, evidently, are working. And spreading.
From the Los Angeles Times:
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Sacramento is home to nearly 1 million Catholics. On a typical Sunday, less than 137,000 can be found in church.Curious to see what all the fuss is about? Check out the videos below. And you can find more at the Catholics Come Home link.
Now, using a strategy straight from the secular playbook, its leaders hope to lure back those who have drifted.
The diocese and nearly a dozen others across the country are preparing to air several thousand prime-time TV commercials in English and Spanish, inviting inactive Catholics to return to their religious roots.
In addition to Sacramento, dioceses in Chicago, Omaha, Providence, R.I., and four other cities will launch the “Catholics Come Home” advertising blitz during Advent, the period before Christmas.
Four more dioceses will follow during Lent next spring. Los Angeles is not among the initial group but could be part of a nationwide campaign slated for December 2010.
"I'm hoping that a significant number of people will give us another look," Sacramento Bishop Jaime Soto said of the campaign. "Many Catholics have a sense of believing but not always a sense of belonging."
The potential audience is huge.
Only about one-quarter of U.S. Catholics say they attend Mass every week, and a majority go to religious services a few times a year or less, according to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University, which conducts social science research about the Catholic church.
Researchers there also found that two-thirds of Catholics believe they can be good members of their faith without attending Mass regularly.
Inactive Catholics cite a number of reasons for their absence. Many do not believe that missing Mass is a sin, the center reported. Others say they are too busy with family or work, or, as other analysts point out, are more interested in material happiness than spiritual fulfillment.
"There is a strange pattern of people who aren't practicing but still have beliefs and pick up parts of the faith," said Mark Gray, a research associate with the center. "They may give up meat on Fridays during Lent or attend Ash Wednesday services."
So what is that statement, agronomy, entemology? It IS exactly a systematic (though it's a small system) statement about the Virgin's role in the Incarnation. It meets the definition.
A small triangle is not a triangle because it's small? Saying "There is not God," is not a theological statement"? No sale.
Enough with the same old, over and over and over again reference to texts we also cite. Do you really think we haven't read, heard, and considered that incident?
I quit watching 60 Minutes because I knew that I wasn't sufficiently righteous to deserve to feel all the "righteous anger" they try to stir up. I'm now seeing that a lot of our adversaries would rather take some quote out of the general context of discourse and practice, make outrageous statements, and draw unwarranted conclusions because it is just so rewarding to feel that little frisson of horror and moral superiority: "EEEEW! THEY're BLASphemers!"
Cut me a break.
If you ever want to know what the Church really teaches, get back to me, I might be able to recommend a course of study. Just don't waste my time with this bogus nonsense.
No! PSS says she will go to hell,scripture says otherwise
“Dearly beloved, let us love one another, for charity is of God. And “EVERY ONE” that loveth, is born of God, and knoweth God.” 1 John 7
“My dearest, if God hath so loved us; we also ought to love one another. No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God “ABIDITH” in us, and his charity is perfected in us. In this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he hath given us of his spirit.”- 1 John 11-13-Emphasis mine
Scripture says that everyone who loves is born of God and if we love we abide in God- so the muslim girl who loves unconditionally and has never heard of Christ IS united with Christ even though she has never heard of Him.
We agree there is only one person by whom men can be saved through: Jesus Christ. And He sends His Spirit to those whom He will. Christ said that NO ONE can do good without ME. NO ONE. Thus, when you see a good Muslim, or a good Hindu love others, what's the explanation? God's Spirit is working through the natural law written on that person's heart. He is saved through Christ, even though He doesn't know that Jesus rose from the dead.
Why is this so hard for you to wrap your mind around?
It's an attack not of issues or truth but of confusion and distraction.
And in those verses you quote, where does it say knowing God will lead to salvation?
In fact, can you show me where in the New Testament it states that knowledge of God is sufficient for salvation? Because the Word of Christ is counter to that.
Knowledge of God, actions of love, do NOT gain you salvation; only Jesus is the way, that is what He said. We are saved by faith; we cannot work our way into Heaven (that is from the Words of Jesus).
'Probably' does not denote an interpretation...It denotes a rejection of what was said by God...
The days in Genesis DO represent individual phases of creation...And God says those phases are days...And He even goes to to trouble of telling you what a day is...
You're not interpreting when you say God 'probably' means something else...You're rejecting...
I’m rejecting your interpretation.
No, that's impossible. It requires faith and works.
This is not a caucus thread. You are more than welcome to post your view.
Yes, I do believe what I posted simply because it is fact. Jesus founded one Church, not many. Christ stated that the Church was to be the final authority, not Scripture - "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church: but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." (Matthew 18:17 ) The Church is Christ's bride (Ephesians 5:29) and has "no spot, wrinkle or blemish" (Ephesians 5:27). Christ also stated that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church (Matthew 16:18) so the Church cannot commit error. In its 2000 year history, not one pope (no matter how bad) has ever erred in matters of faith or morals. No other institution can make the same claim. This is testimony to the fact that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.
The Church is to be organized (1 Timothy 3:1,8; Titus 1:7 ). As for authority, it was St. Peter alone that was the "rock" upon which Christ established His Church (Matthew 16:18). And it was St. Peter alone that was given the task of "feeding" Christ's sheep (John 21:15-17 ). Scripture clearly points out St. Peter as Christ's representative on earth. According to Scripture, Christ wanted us to be one (John 17:22-23). We are all as a Church to be of one mind and to think the same (Philippians 2:2; Romans 15:5). There is only to be one "faith" (Ephesians 4:3-6), not many. For the Church is Christ's Body and Christ only had one Body, not many.
Scripture is very straightforward on this issue. One Church .. not many.
This is often quoted as "Jesus giving authority" to the church and church alone. Yet you completely take it out of context by ignoring what Jesus was commanding you to refer to the church; see Matthew 18:15-17 for the full context:
15 "If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.16 If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.
The church has authority to adjudicate in sins between Christians, and only after you cannot resolve it between the two parties, or between the two parties and a few fellow believers; that is not in dispute, and is what Jesus actually said.
You twist the Word of Christ when you remove the context of His words. Clearly they relate to sins between Christians, not to all things possible in the World, and certainly not to who has authority over the teachings of Christ. And note that the church is to be appealed to only AFTER individuals or a small group cannot come to agreement. You are to take it to the church only at that point.
Those verses say those who love abide in Christ and you're indicating that those who abide in Christ cannot be saved because they may never have heard of Him.thus abiding in Christ means nothing according to you.
Where does love come from if it's not from God according to you?The devil cannot love,so that rules him out
“”Knowledge of God, actions of love, do NOT gain you salvation; only Jesus is the way, that is what He said. We are saved by faith; we cannot work our way into Heaven (that is from the Words of Jesus).””
WOW! Are you confused-True love can never be considered works because ALL love is from God-remember what 1 John says?
What if a muslim who never knew Christ gave up his own life to save your child from a burning car.
Would you say he deserves to go to hell?
Good Night!
I wish you peace!
Well, I guess that's what the scripture says...
Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, Rome is the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by Rome.
Good for you!! That is sound Catholic programing. Do you watch Fr. Groeschel’s show or Fr. Corapi.
I predict someday these two WILL be cannonized saints.
There is nothing bogus about blasphemy. I realize you’ve read those scriptures before and ignored them - doesn’t mean you will ignore them forever, or that others reading have read them before.
Your concept of Mariology extends to saying Mary lived - HARDLY what any rational person would consider a “study” of Mary. Most of us can read Genesis without indulging in Adamology. There doesn’t seem to be much interest in Catholicism or Protestantism in Paulology, although Paul played a greater role in Christianity than Mary.
As a Protestant, I accepted Catholic claims not to worship Mary - UNTIL I read what the Pope wrote. When I read that, I searched the Vatican website, believing it had to be a spoof.
Nope. A Catholic may have been so immersed in Mariology so long as to read that without recoiling - but I believe most non-Catholics reading that passage will understand why I call it blasphemy.
The quote was not out of context, nor is it the only one available. It isn’t “60 Minutes” style gotcha. It is part and parcel of what the Catholic Church believes. If you doubt me, take it up with your Pope. He wrote it.
Scripture is clear on one Church. It is not correct that Peter was the Vicar of Christ, or that he passed on Apostolic Authority.
For the verses you referenced, please read the entire book. It is addressed to believers in Christ already; it does NOT address unbelievers - non-Christians. You're taking a letter written to Christians and extrapolating it to non-Christians.
Where does love come from if it's not from God according to you?The devil cannot love,so that rules him out
Love comes from God. On that we agree; however, do you dispute the clear words of Christ where he states the only way to God is through Him?
You can do good works, you can be a good person. That does not mean you are saved; in fact, there's that little verse about "works without faith".
WOW! Are you confused-True love can never be considered works because ALL love is from God-remember what 1 John says?
I'm not confused at all! Rather, you are the one saying that because a person does good works and exhibits love for their fellow man they will be saved. That, my friend, is counter to the Word of Christ.
What if a muslim who never knew Christ gave up his own life to save your child from a burning car.
Would you say he deserves to go to hell?
I would say that Christ says he is going to hell. Christ's words, not mine. Unequivocal, indisputable. And that is why Christ gave us the Great Commission, to spread the message of Christ and His salvation.
He that "does not believe" does not apply to the ignorant! It applies to those who TURN AWAY WILLINGLY from Christ's Law of Love. Everyone knows it is wrong to murder, to lie, to treat their parents poorly. They know it is wrong because they condemn others who do it, either to others or them! Thus, we ALL have a conscience. We ALL can follow this Law within us, with God's grace. A person who "does not believe" is NOT a person who is ignorant, but one who REJECTS God.
STF-"What if a muslim who never knew Christ gave up his own life to save your child from a burning car. Would you say he deserves to go to hell?"
PSS-I would say that Christ says he is going to hell. Christ's words, not mine. Unequivocal, indisputable. And that is why Christ gave us the Great Commission, to spread the message of Christ and His salvation.
You interpret it that way because it allows YOU to condemn those who don;t agree with you and your personal interpretation of a book (The Bible).
I can see why non Christians who love would reject what you preach.
Some of the statements that you make are not only denied by non-Catholics, but even by Catholics. To say that the popes have never erred in doctrine or morals is about like someone saying Adolf Hitler never killed Jews. The problem is that the Church of Christ is not the same as the Roman Church. The Roman Catholic denomination is a purely human institution which has nothing in common with which Jesus instituted. The “rock” is not the person of Peter, but his confession. Christ is the head of the church, not the pope. It is Christ who will build is Church, and everyone that confesses that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, is the church.
Such as the Muslims who are taught that Jesus was a great prophet, but not the Son of God as He claimed. That is not willingly turning away from Christ?
And what about Jesus' claims to be the only path to the Father? NO ONE comes to the Father but through Jesus. His words.
Everyone knows it is wrong to murder, to lie, to treat their parents poorly.
In the Koran, it is fully acceptable to lie to non-Muslims. Apparently not everyone knows it's wrong to lie; some cultures and religions encourage it! In the case of the Muslim culture, lying to non-Muslims earns you good works to get to Heaven; they actively ENCOURAGE lying as a means to salvation!
You interpret it that way because it allows YOU to condemn those who don;t agree with you and your personal interpretation of a book (The Bible).
No, I take the Words of Christ at face-value. He claimed to be the ONLY way to the Father; there is NO other way. It is the Catechism and the Catholic Church that has invented this way for non-believing Muslims to be saved without Jesus.
Tell me, where in the New Testament does it say or indicate a way to salvation that does NOT include Christ? How can a man be saved without Jesus?
I can see why non Christians who love would reject what you preach.
Christianity, and the claims of Christ, are quite radical. They are confrontational, and they are absolute. As a father loves his children by exercising authority and discpline, God loves us. It is unconditional, but to be with Him we must accept His rule. And that rule is: Jesus is the only way to be with Him.
And given the weakness the Catholic Church shows in the most fundamental of all Christian beliefs (that Jesus is the only way to salvation), I can see how Catholics are leaving the church, because that same church has put the Rodney-King-Approach to religion (can't we all just get along) ahead of the Words of Christ.
Please rectify your claim that a Muslim who denies Christ implicitly (in their religious upbringing), and who refuses to acknowledge Jesus as the Savior, can enter into the kingdom of Heaven when Jesus' own words are counter to that.
Wasn't any interpretation for you to reject...I wrote what God said...You don't reject an interpretation, you reject what God says...
*****not one pope (no matter how bad) has ever erred in matters of faith or morals.*****
OF course this is complete nonsense...
I found this little tid-bit in response to one of your statements:::
Question: I heard that there were very immoral popes, some of them had mistresses and children, and others used simony to obtain that office. Is it true?
Answer: There were some evil and immoral popes; but I am not convinced that it is particularly edifying to go through all the filth and corruption of papal history. A few examples should suffice.
Pope Honorius was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. Pope Christopher became pope by forcibly dethroning his predecessor, Leo V, and putting him into prison. He was then driven from the chair by his successor, Sergius III. Pope John XII was a coarse, immoral man, whose life was such that the Lateran was spoken of as a a house of prostitution, and the moral corruption in Rome became the subject of general odium. Pope Benedict IX sold the papacy to Pope Gregory VI for a large sum of money. Pope Clement VI imposed taxes, sold beneficiaries and squandered the church riches on pompous banquets and receptions. Pope Alexander VI was known for murder, bribery, and selling positions of authority in the Catholic Church. Pope Gregory VII and his successors used forged documents in order to expand the power of the papacy.
Someone may say, “Granted, there were some evil Popes — what does that prove about the papacy as an institution?”
The Bible warns God’s people against false prophets and false teachers. Our Lord Jesus told his disciples: “Beware of false prophets.” And he told us how to identify them: “You will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15, 16). The apostle Peter mentions their covetousness: “In their greed these teachers will exploit” the church (2 Peter 2:3); Jude mentions their immoral character: “ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness...walk according to their own ungodly lusts...sensual persons” (Jude 1:4, 18, 19); while the apostle Paul describes the character of a genuine bishop: “blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money” (Titus 1:7).
We do not suggest that all popes were immoral like the ones mentioned above; in fact, most of them were not. Nor do we suggest that immorality only infects the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Pastors and teachers in evangelical churches, as well as Catholic popes, bishops and priests, have been exposed as hypocrites.
But there is a great difference. As evangelical Christians we identify and honour a pastor as a worthy minister of Christ if he faithfully preachers the apostolic message and if his life is consistent with his message. We do not hesitate to identify immoral and greedy ministers as false teachers no matter what they claim to be. They are false teachers!
Take Peter and Judas as examples. Both were apostles of Jesus Christ. Both made very serious mistakes — Peter denied the Lord, and Judas betrayed him. Yet Peter repented and was restored to the ministry, while Judas did not, and was disowned by the church.
But Catholics cannot follow the guidance of Scriptures to expose false teachers. They are not allowed by the magisterium. If a Pope had been lawfully elected, he must be considered a true Pope, the Vicar of Christ and head of the entire church, no matter how morally and spiritually decadent. One Catholic author wrote in all seriousness: “Even a bad and immoral Pope cannot be deposed. The faithful can only pray for his conversion of heart or that Saint Joseph bless him with a happy and speedy death if his behavior becomes scandalous.” Catholics are obliged to submit to “Judas” even after he is exposed as a false teacher by his treachery and impenitence.
Benedict XVI is the 265th Pope according to the current list of Popes – and these include the apostates mentioned above and others like them. They cannot take them out of the list, of course, even though they admit that they were grossly immoral; otherwise the Vatican would have nothing to hang its claim to apostolic authority. The chain must be intact. But what good is a chain if even one of its link is corroded, let alone if there are a score of rusty links? It still breaks down at the weak links and the claimed apostolic authority of the papacy falls to the ground and breaks in pieces.
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.