Posted on 01/24/2014 3:54:59 PM PST by ebb tide
What has intrigued me most about Pope Francis is not the way in which Catholics -- well, most of them, anyway -- have embraced him but the way in which countless Protestants have moved into his fan club.
More is at play here than simple celebrity in our overwrought pop culture. At least, I hope so.
The Protestant fascination with him hasn't broken down the many theological, liturgical and structural barriers that still exist between Protestantism and Catholicism, but it has softened them a bit and it has caused some Protestants to want to figure out what makes Francis tick, what Jesuit theology is all about and what ground we Protestants might share in common with Catholics.
My own congregation is a good example of this phenomenon. Our pastor, Paul Rock, recently began a sermon series he's calling "Jesus, the Pope and a Protestant Walk Into a Bar." His sermons, which started Sunday, can be found here [1].
To alert people to this series, he posted this short video [2] on our church's website [1]. As Paul says in the video, "This is a pope who has become the people's pope. ... The fact that Pope Francis has been an inspiration to both Catholics and Protestants I think provides us a unique opportunity to take a fresh look at this Catholic-Protestant divide."
I suspect that the intense Protestant interest in Francis is a sign that deep in our protesting marrow, there is a yearning for unity and a latent sense of regret that it had to come to all that division in Martin Luther's time and that the divide has never been healed.
For good and sufficient reasons back then, insistent Catholic reformers broke away from Rome in what became known as the Protestant Reformation, and although countless feelings were hurt and vicious charges traded, it was surely a reluctant parting. The Luthers, the Ulrich Zwinglis and the John Calvins of the time first sought to fix what they thought had gone wrong in the church. But failing that, they felt they had no choice but to leave.
So off they went in a huff while the Catholics they left behind mostly shouted after them not to let the door slam them in the butt on the way out. It was sad, though perhaps avoidable, but we can't rewrite that history now.
No divorce happens because of what just one of the partners does, thinks or says. It's always a group failure, as it was in this case. But it's also true that no divorce happens without some residual regret.
Some of that residual regret is helping to fuel the Protestant fascination with Francis. Whether it will mean anything in the way of reconciliation over the long haul is unknown. But it's certain that no reconciliation will be possible if both Protestants and Catholics continue to deny the regret they feel and their hope for a different future.
To Protestants, one of the most attractive things about Francis is his humility, his willingness not to rely on, defend and protect all aspects of the hierarchical system of polity that has marked the papacy, especially in the time since Pope John XXIII. That system, at least to Protestant eyes, seems to be in tension with the idea straight from the mouth of Jesus that true leaders must first be servants.
Now Francis not only is saying exactly that, he's acting as if he believes it.
Protestant polity usually is more decentralized and democratic than the Roman system of governance, but that doesn't mean some Protestant leaders don't also fall into the trap of being insufferable monarchists and worldly kingdom-builders.
Today, however, when Protestants set aside that nonsense and focus on humbly seeking to follow the God of love revealed in Jesus Christ, they find they have been joined by a fellow pilgrim, Francis. And we should welcome each other on the journey.
[Bill Tammeus, a Presbyterian elder and former award-winning faith columnist for The Kansas City Star, writes the daily "Faith Matters" blog [3] for the Star's website and a monthly column for The Presbyterian Outlook. His latest book, co-authored with Rabbi Jacques Cukierkorn, is They Were Just People: Stories of Rescue in Poland During the Holocaust [4]. Email him at wtammeus@gmail.com [5].]
I came in this morning ready to read the rants of those who love the organization more than Christ Himself and found your remarks to Steelfish. There is little more I could possibly add. You captured the self-aggrandizing mentality, the disregard for the Scriptures, and the smugness from which those entrenched in the Romanist view suffer. Great post. I see clearly in my mind’s eye the crouching in the corner...
Not even at EWTN?
5817 Old Leeds Rd.
Irondale, Al. 35210
ping yourself. Your comment in 15 in no way dealt with the simple fact that the Pater Noster is the Our Father and contained - in its entirety - in scripture as you denied it to be.
“no genuflecting, no paternosters”
Hate to break it to you but the our father, and kneeling are very scriptural.
Funny how facts contradict a good rant aint it ? :)
Thanks for those stats.
Welcome to FR, I hope that in time your posts will start making some sense.
Well, don’t bother to read the text, my FRiend...it might scare you out of the Romanist cult. Jesus is saying that if you do not forgive, it will NOT be forgiven you. Read the next line.
He also says that if you call your brother a fool, you will go to hell fire, so be very careful what you say around here. But, this, my FRiend, is the Mosaic Law, which you would notice had you kept reading to Matt. 7:12(you do read, don’t you?).
OR if you don’t accept this as the Law, then what about Matt. 5:48, “Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”?
Now, just so the rest of us get the picture straight...do you see yourself doing this? If not, why not repeat this little ditty along with your “paternoster”? And be sure to forgive, or you will NOT be forgiven. (”Ping yourself” sounds a little harsh). Hermeneutics are your friend.
That tiny list is the verification of the fact that the democrats own the vote of the Catholic denomination, whose church members we import by the millions, which was the goal of JFK and the left, who passed his immigration bill in 1965.
Protestants have only preferred the democrat 3 times, 1932, 1936, and 1964, yet democrats confidently believe that they own the future of America, due to immigration.
Oh, you broke it to me alright...you just did not read the whole thing. Read on, sir. And, ping to 15
The Pater Noster is contained in scripture. If you’re not actually going to address your own error, I don’t see the point of your post.
The pater noster is a repetition of the so-called "Lord's Prayer", known by Romanists as an "Our Father". It is said because Jesus said, "Pray then in this way..."
But, it doesn't stop where the Romanists claim it stops, thus it is not actually used the way Scripture presents it. The Romanists ignore the real meat of Jesus' remarks. He goes on to say to the audience that if they do not forgive, they will not be forgiven. I was simply saying that this is not a part of the Gospel that was ultimately delivered to the Gentiles who were grafted in at the Cross (Read all of Eph. 2).
Thus, there is simply no such thing as a "pater noster" in the Scripture. It is a cobbled together, mangled mis-use of the words Jesus spoke to the Jews during a Sermon on the Mount teaching the Law. If this is not plain enough for you (or you wish to live under the Law), then it is possible you are not granted the eyes to see the Gospel.
Thanks, bud. Who knows? Maybe we’ll blossom simultaneously. One can only dream, I suppose.
Normally when a new sign-up comes on like you are he is a retread returning with a new name and old grudges. I guess we will see, but whether you are retread or just brand new, it wouldn’t hurt for you to try to focus more on thread topics, instead of hostility and seeming to pursue personal grudges.
“But, it doesn’t stop where the Romanists claim it stops, thus it is not actually used the way Scripture presents it.”
That is false. Only some mss. include the gloss you are referring to in the text where it doesn’t actually belong. It is clearly said in the liturgy, however, and that is how it was included in the gloss which was eventually included in the text by some copyists.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DOXOLOG.HTM
The Eastern Orthodox also get it right: http://www.goarch.org/chapel/liturgical_texts/lords_prayer
And they use it in their liturgy much as we do:
All.
Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespassesas we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.
Priest.
For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages.
All.
Amen.
Only Protestants from the KJV tradition get it wrong.
Heretic and “proto-Protestant” John Wycliffe got it right:
Oure fadir that art in heuenes, halewid be thi name;
10 thi kyngdoom come to; be thi wille don `in erthe as in heuene;
11 yyue to vs this dai oure `breed ouer othir substaunce;
12 and foryyue to vs oure dettis, as we foryyuen to oure dettouris; and lede vs not in to temptacioun,
13 but delyuere vs fro yuel.
14 Amen.
Tyndale, however, used a faulty ms.:
O oure father which arte in heve halowed be thy name.
10 Let thy kyngdome come. Thy wyll be fulfilled as well in erth as it ys in heven.
11 Geve vs this daye oure dayly breede.
12 And forgeve vs oure treaspases eve as we forgeve oure trespacers.
13 And leade vs not into teptacion: but delyver vs fro evell. For thyne is ye kyngedome and ye power and ye glorye for ever. Amen.
Tyndale’s translation was essentially what was adopted by the KJV translators and later Books of Common Prayer.
Notice here that the ASV - a 19th century revision of the KJV - got it right:
Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth.
11 Give us this day our daily bread.
12 And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13 And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil [one.]
But he disagreed with you, so of course he must be a retread...Probably the most common copout from older posters arguing with new signups.
We’re going to get you those reading lessons for Christmas...
You missed my point by a country mile.
I ain’t said a damn thing about “church going” anything. I gave you the numbers.
I am focused on the thread and posting to it, this was just silly.
To: ansel12
I’m a member of that Church, and I don’t vote that way.
Your move.
69 posted on 1/24/2014 9:12:12 PM by TheDandyMan
and I responded to it.
To: TheDandyMan
LOL, the silliest post that I have seen in some time, thanks.
75 posted on 1/24/2014 10:02:46 PM by ansel12
Your post to me is pretty silly also, and not useful to the thread, it is purely personal.
“1932, 1936, and 1964”
Protestants voting for your heroes FDR and LBJ? Now that’s funny.
“We’re going to get you those reading lessons for Christmas...”
No, why don’t you keep them since you need to brush up to say the least?
“You missed my point by a country mile.”
No, the miss is the idea that the Pater Noster is not in the Bible. It is. Also, the idea that the doxology is part of the Our Father, is completely mistaken.
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.