Posted on 03/06/2014 2:10:35 PM PST by NYer
A team of Vatican-appointed medical experts has verified the authenticity of a miracle attributed to the intercession of Archbishop Fulton Sheen, moving the renowned preacher closer to beatification.
Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria, Illinois, announced on March 6 that the panel of experts had found no medical explanation for the case of a child who was restored to life after being stillborn. Medical personnel had tried for an hour to revive the child, without success, while the parents prayed for the intercession of Archbishop Sheen. The child, born in September 2010, is now a healthy 3-year-old.
“Today is a significant step in the cause for the beatification and canonization of our beloved Fulton Sheen, a priest of Peoria and a son of the heartland who went on to change the world,” said Bishop Jenky, who had formally opened the cause for beatification of Archbishop Sheen in 2002.
The reported miracle will now be examined by a team of theologians, and if they approve it, submitted to the entire Congregation for the Causes of Saints. The final approval of the miracle would fulfill the last requirement for the beatification of Cardinal Sheen, who was proclaimed “Venerable” by Pope Benedict XVI in June 2012.
Born in Illinois in 1895, Fulton Sheen was ordained to the priesthood in the Peoria diocese in 1919. He taught philosophy and theology at the Catholic University of America, before becoming an auxiliary bishop of New York in 1951. His fame soared as a result of work in broadcasting; in the 1950s his weekly show, “Life Is Worth Living,” was the most popular program on American television. Bishop Sheen was appointed Bishop of Rochester, New York, in 1966, and raised to the title of archbishop on his retirement in 1969. He died in New York in 1979.
Additional sources for this story
Some links will take you to other sites, in a new window.
True, except they are sinners in all ways. James 2:10-12
So it is that with all that rely on the law for salvation.
So it is that believers in Christ are saints on this earth at the same time sinners. 1 Cor 6:1-3
Yeah, no [kidding*], there’s no medical explanation.
I like to think I would say this even if I weren’t coming in next month (I sign the book tomorrow night): If there’s any appropriate response to what happened in this case other than “Thank You, God, and thank you for your prayers, Excellency!” I truly don’t know what it would be. God bless them all.
*(I’m trying to keep it clean.)
Well, this Vietnam veteran has a bone to pick with Sheen who should not have publically undermined our efforts once our forces were committed. A lifetime of good works corrupted by his association with communists, out-and-out Traitors and other charlatans.
He was also an evolutionist and a partisan of Vatican II. His "conservative" reputation is largely undeserved. But after the canonization of Cardinal Newman, anything goes.
It's only a matter of time before Teilhard de Chardin achieves "sainthood."
I apologize for disobeying your instructions.
But I have a few more questions for you. I hope you don't mind me asking.
_______________________________________________
So you're saying that Christ's Church had disciplinary authority over sinful Christians?
Do I have that much right?
Was this Church visible? Or were Christians to go to an invisible church to settle disciplinary issues?
If visible, does that visible Church still exist?
Or did it disappear?
When did it disappear?
"Did the gates of hell prevail against" this visible church?
If Christ's Church had the power to discipline someone who sins against me, wouldn't that same Church have to define sin?
Would this definition be infallible or fallible?
If fallible, wouldn't this contradict St. Paul, who called the church, "the pillar and foundation of truth"?
Or was St. Paul exempting this church's theological teachings?
But aren't churches defined by their theological doctrines?
Or was St. Paul referring to a different church than Christ?
Did Christ found separate churches, with different teachings?
But how could separate and visible churches, with different doctrines and disciplines, settle disputes?
Wouldn't this render Christ's command void and meaningless?
Does it seem odd to you that Christ would command us to obey His Church in discipline, but not in theology?
Aren't Churches defined by their theological doctrines?
Was His Church defective in Its teachings?
STA,
When someone posts a verse and tries to pass off the meaning into something else, and it is pointed out to them and they continue to post it... they either did not see it, they did not agree with it, they did not understand it, they understood it but want to be deceitful, etc. I have no idea which. I assume you posted it because it is a habit you’ve done before. The verses you posted, however, have nothing to do with the topic.
OK, here are your answers...
“So you’re saying that Christ’s Church had disciplinary authority over sinful Christians?”
It would be more accurate to say (in this passage) the Assembly was the arbiter between Christians who had a disagreement and their decision was final. In other passages, the local assembly is instructed to discipline members who are engaged in willful sin.
“Was this Church visible? Or were Christians to go to an invisible church to settle disciplinary issues?”
Local assemblies are always visible.
“If visible, does that visible Church still exist? Or did it disappear?”
They are located worldwide still and are still visible.
“Did the gates of hell prevail against” this visible church?
No, despite the failures of different assemblies, and their leaders (including “popes”), Christ’s assembly on earth continues to grow. At times, He removes their lampstand (Revelation) and they may be visible, but they are no longer His assembly. At other times, they become so laden down with false doctrine, they are not longer effective at all. In practical terms, they remove themselves.
“If Christ’s Church had the power to discipline someone who sins against me, wouldn’t that same Church have to define sin?”
Absolutely not. God took care of that through inspiration of Scripture. Sin is ultimately disobedience to God. His nature defines it. It is revealed for you to see, if you read it.
“Would this definition be infallible or fallible?”
See above - question is irrelevant, since sin is defined already in Scripture... and God’s Holy Word is infallible. A church is never infallible.
“If fallible, wouldn’t this contradict St. Paul, who called the church, “the pillar and foundation of truth”?”
No. The assembly has the job of being a foundation (support) of truth and a pillar (upholding) God’s truth. The church is not the truth itself. God and His Word are the truth that is to be upheld and supported.
Of course, history shows us that often assemblies of all kinds have not supported or upheld His truth. His truth is infallible. The assembly is never infallible. It is made up of a fallible leadership and fallible members. This is why every human other than Christ needed a Savior. I should add, if God wanted to come right out and say His assembly was infallible, He would have done so. He did not.
“Or was St. Paul exempting this church’s theological teachings?”
See above. Answered there.
“But aren’t churches defined by their theological doctrines?”
Somewhat, but it is inadequate.
The great ones are defined by their love of God, their love of other Christians, their love of His Word, etc. Christ said all men would know us by our love for each other - not our doctrines - though doctrine keeps us on track and limits error. I hope you know that the faith that saves always results in the life of Christ in us being seen in good works to honor God.
“Or was St. Paul referring to a different church than Christ?”
Same.
“Did Christ found separate churches, with different teachings?”
Did God create just one kind of flower, one kind of bird, one kind of weather, one kind of star, one kind of cloud, one kind of person, one skin color? If you look at the most central creeds, you will find that most things argued about by Christians are not included. True assemblies share a core teaching. How it is expressed differs. In your religion, you call those “rites”, I believe.
I realize your question makes some kind of sense to you because of your presuppositions, but every true assembly is always made of those who have entrusted themselves to His complete sacrifice for their sins for salvation. It often includes those seeking Him, who have yet to do this and it almost always includes those who claim to follow Him, but do not.
So to summarize this to answer your question, which is a wrong question, there has never been a time in history where the “church” got everything right. If there was, my extensive study of church history has never revealed it. Every church is comprised of humans after all. Humans are prone to emotion, sin, error, and are creatures of the zeitgeist of their error.
“But how could separate and visible churches, with different doctrines and disciplines, settle disputes?”
Each assembly is given instructions on offices of the assembly, responsibilities of those offices and instructions on how an assembly is to behave and how to carry out discipline in that assembly. The truth is that most assemblies do not ever seem to carry out discipline. I go to a church that does follow scripture in that regard.
“Wouldn’t this render Christ’s command void and meaningless?”
Of course not. Two disagreeing Christians would go before their assembly, as commanded, and the local leadership would act in accordance with Scripture.
“Does it seem odd to you that Christ would command us to obey His Church in discipline, but not in theology?”
Christians are never commanded to have identical theology. They are commanded to obey their leaders and highly esteem them. He gave teachers to the assembly. He also gave the leaders of the assembly the instructions to discipline their members, to exhort them, to reprove them, to encourage them. So, no.
Rather than try to take leaps to get where you want to go, it would be better to go to God’s Word and see what He said.
“Aren’t Churches defined by their theological doctrines?”
Answered this duplicate question above already. See that.
“Was His Church defective in Its teachings?”
OFTEN, throughout history on many issues. It’s actions have been deplorable at times too.
Absolutely. Him and Mother Angelica, who should also be the patron saint of businessmen. Her biography, by Raymond Arroyo, is breathtaking.
It seems that me that the term "faith" requires definition. And there is some disagreement among Christian churches about the definition of that term.
I don't see how any individual Protestant church could settle any meaningful disciplinary or doctrinal disagreement definitively, since there is so much disciplinary and doctrinal divergence.
This situation makes it impossible to fulfill Christ's command regarding taking "it to the church," rendering His command meaningless. (Notice that Jesus did not say, "a church."
Should I consider a Baptist as a "pagan or tax collector," because he won't have his disagreement settled at a Presbyterian church? A Catholic church? Orthodox? Assemblies of God? Vice Versa?
There is only one visible Church that has been in continuous existence since Christ.
____________________________________________________
And it is ironic that Protestants reject Christ's command to "listen to the church," (which one!) on the basis of Luther's doctrine of "the Bible ALONE," which isn't recorded in the Bible, nor taught by Christ's Church.
“It seems that me that the term “faith” requires definition. And there is some disagreement among Christian churches about the definition of that term.”
Greek is specific.
“I don’t see how any individual Protestant church could settle any meaningful disciplinary or doctrinal disagreement definitively, since there is so much disciplinary and doctrinal divergence.”
It happens every day. Perhaps you are not looking at it from the reality of local assemblies, but from the perspective of different assemblies?
“This situation makes it impossible to fulfill Christ’s command regarding taking “it to the church,” rendering His command meaningless. (Notice that Jesus did not say, “a church.””
Oh, not at all. It works in real life every day across the world. The assembly is where the believers assemble. That is where the command of Christ is fulfilled.
“Should I consider a Baptist as a “pagan or tax collector,” because he won’t have his disagreement settled at a Presbyterian church? A Catholic church? Orthodox? Assemblies of God? Vice Versa?”
This is why I suggested that your difficulty is arising because you are overlooking local assemblies and are focusing on different denominations. Local disputes are historically settled at local assemblies, where believers are accountable to the leadership.
“There is only one visible Church that has been in continuous existence since Christ.”
There is just one visible church that is united in faith in Him and His sacrifice, regardless of denomination.
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.