5 MILLION PROCESS IN HONOR OF OUR EUCHARISTIC LORD IN SAO PAULO!
Saturday, June 5, 2010
5 MILLION AT CORPUS CHRISTI PROCESSION IN SAO PAULO!
When 5 million people come out for a demonstration, in this case, the Eucharistic Procession on the Solemnity of Corpus Christ on Thursday, you'd think this would make the nightly news or someone's secular newspaper. Did anyone read about this anywhere but here. Click on link below to read the story!
5 MILLION PROCESS IN HONOR OF OUR EUCHARISTIC LORD IN SAO PAULO!
5 MILLION PROCESS IN HONOR OF OUR EUCHARISTIC LORD IN SAO PAULO!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
41 comments:
I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it was a Protestant counter-procession, not a Catholic one. Oh, and it was two million people, not five million.
Corpus Christi is a national holiday, and the Protestants devised this "march" as a way of diverting people from the real procession.
The real Corpus Christi processions are very beautiful; colorful "carpets" made of collored wood powder are the mark of the real processions, qhich attract some hundreds of thousand people; not as many as in the Protestant march, because each parish has its own procession, but it is hard to drive around in Corpus Christi and not see a procession. You can see a few Corpus Christi carpets here: http://news.google.com.br/news/search?pz=1&cf=i&ned=pt-BR_br&hl=pt-BR&q=tapetes+corpus+christi&ict=ln
Thank you Carlos for the links and the clarification! That's sad, so much for ecumenism! Fr. McDonald
Once again, Good Father, you misrepresent ecumenism. The antipathy shown between one denomination and another - and we have shown our fair share - is not an ecumenical thing.
Ecumenism seeks unity. Counter-processions, which are not seeking unity, are not "ecumenism." Seems we have found another lacuna in your formation at The park...
Good point PN, so why were we so naive about ecumenism? By now it should have prevented this sort of thing.
We were possibly naive, but I would characterize it as somewhat "irrational exhuberance," to borrow a short phrase.
By now you should have converted everyone in Macon to Christianity. Why has this not come to pass?
I would suggest the same obstacles to your 100% success are at work in Sao Paulo.
Once again, if the Catholic Church is the true One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and we really believe that, then that shapes and limits our view of ecumenicism. There is only so far the Church can go to meet the Protestant denominations, and I would suggest that it is a very short walk. How do we define "ecumenical," anyway? It means "for Christianity to inhabit the whole world" in its strictest definition. That would indicate that Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, should be about converting the heathen...the heathen being all other religions (except Judaism) and the un-churched. Well, that's fine and dandy. But, that isn't what it means to your so-called "progressive" Christians, your cafeteria Catholics, your unbelieving seminary professors, your anything goes Episcopalians, and your Bible whacking Protestant ministers. What it means to them is that the Church should "meet them halfway." Half way to what? What do they want the Church to give up...well, I can tell you from experience in many so-called "ecumenical"
discussions. Remember COCU from back in the good old '70's. That is a start for your divinity school types. But, really...what is it Protestants don't like...hmmmm...let's see: Mary (and everything that goes with her), the Pope, Rome, the Magisterium, the Real Presence...and that is just for starters. Every protestant denomination espouses some form of "sola scriptura," which is impossible on the face of it. So, Pater, what are you willing to give up...wait...I'm not sure I should have asked you that. Nobody seems to want a tough Catholic Church. But, you know, sometimes you have to be a mean Christian, more particularly, a mean Catholic. Now, I don't mean you should go around punching people or bullying them. But, I do mean "uncompromising" and able to articulate it. The Catholic Church will only lose in ecumenical discussions as "ecumenical" is now defined. And, hey, who ever said hearts would not be hardened toward the Gospel? Forgive me, but as an ecumenical beginning, maybe Catholics should read "The Institutes of the Christian Religion." That's by Calvin. Two polemical and dogmatic volumes.
I am not suggesting that it form our theology or doctrine, however, it will teach you how to be a tough, mean Christian. It is, at least, the pinnacle of Protestant theology...unless you want to tackle Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics...and I wouldn't wish that upon anyone.
I understand what Pinanv525 means and would concur with the everything but say it is 'confident firmness" rather than meanness. What I know I must do must be done and what I know I must not shan't. People will judge it harshly to suit their own purposes anyway, so there is not purpose to putting a mean face on it.
rcg
I used the term "mean" advisedly because such phrases as "confident firmness" don't quite catch the drift. There is a
theological "meanness," or toughness, if you prefer, that is missing in the Church's dialogue with the world and with other denominations. Pope Benedict has it, however, but it seems to me to be vastly unappreciated by those who should be paying close attention. (Fr. MacDonald has it, too, and it just drives some people crazy that he is not your good old "go along to get along" smiling Irish Priest. Thank God for his Italian side.)
Example of good old theological meanness: Reinhold Neighbor, when asked about current Protestant theology: "It leads men without sin into a kingdom without judgement, through a Christ without a cross." This kind of no nonsense summary response is just the kind of dismissive thinking we need in the face of bold and shameless secular attacks and phony ecumenical egg sucking. I like mean better.
Pin, if you had read Archbishop Gregory's address to the National Workshop on Christian Unity, held in Tampa last April, you would have found precisely the "confident firmness" you seek.
I suspect, though, that you have not read his address. I find that the great majority of folks who rant and rave about how "terrible" the ecumenical movement has been have had virtually no experience of what actually goes on in theological dialogues. Further, they have never taken the time to read one of the agreed upon statements between our Church and one of the ecclesial communities of the Reformation, and to reflect on the statement. Neither have thay had any training in ecumenism beyond reading the lastest screed to appear in the pages of "The Wanderer" which, by the way, is trash.
In short, people who rant and rave about ecumenism, and priests who intentionally misrepresent ecumenism, are speaking from sublime ignorance, and they seem to like it that way. They are just like the anti-Catholic folks who rant about this or that Catholic belief or practice, having never, not once, actually investigated our Church's teaching.
I highly recommend Cardinal Kasper's new book, "Harvesting the Fruits: Basic Aspects of Christian Faith in Ecumenical Dialogue" if you really want to know what has been going on for the last 40 years. (Continuum International Publishing Group, 2009)
BTW, Happy 30th Anniversary, Good Father!
Ecumenism got dragged down into the gutter with all the other diversity nonsense. Most other denominations have all abandoned whatever shreds of partial truth they once possessed to appeal to the wants and desires of a secular value system. Once you start down that slippery slope, you slide further and further away from the notion of "absolute truth" and everything becomes an exercise in compromise.
There simply can be no compromise where absolute truth is concerned. If that means we as Catholics have to stand and be slaughtered by angry mobs of atheists some day for our failure to compromise, then so be it.
At the end of the day, an honest theologian must know the full truth resides with the Catholic Church. When world events need commenting on matters of religion the world turns to Peter and no one else.
Pater, where might one find a copy of Archbishop Gregory's keynote address from that workshop. I did a search and found lots of references to it, but could not find a copy of the text.
As for lots of us "ranters" about ecumenical discussion, forgive us for being jaded, but Cardinal Kasper (Head of the "Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity")is part of the problem. In order to make real progress the Pope has been required to leave the Cardinal out of the process, for example, with the TAC and the SSPX.
Pater, You are asking me to take seriously a conference which was opened by a female Episcopal priestess and in which the heralded Archbishop Gregory expressed "disappointment" over the recent Catholic comments regarding the Episcopalian abominations and the nonsense going on over at ELCA? Give me a break. Incidentally, I would hardly call my comments above raving and ranting. I posed several serious questions about the definitions and current uses of "ecumenicalism" which, as usual, you refuse to answer but continue in your angry, hostile, and petulant efforts at saying something. I doubt you can be completely honest with us about your beliefs regarding the Church and its dogma and social policies. If you could, you'd likely be saying Mass out at Saint Watchacallit's Episcopal Church by the gold course.
Also, I have had quite a bit of experience with "what goes on in theological dialogues" as well as in the so-called "ecumenical" movement. I have come to rather different conclusions than you or the good Archbishop, however, with regard to the possibilities of such wishful thinking...unless the Church is willing to give up far more than is wise. The goal of such conferences, after all, is to have one completely interim Communion (I'm talking about Eucharist)for all denominations. That isn't unity...it is conglomeration...Good Pater.
Incidentally, Cardinal Kasper is not exactly carrying the torch for strong Catholic identity vis a vis the protestant churches. He is an appeaser. At least we know now "where you're coming from," Good Pater. Do I hear the Coca Cola song playing somewhere...
Cardinal Kasper quotes the following passages from agreed upon statements with our dialogue partners. In which do you find "apeasement," "compromise,"
"secular values," "wishful thinking," or "conglomeration?"
"In Christ, the Holy Spirit renews our hearts and equips and calls us to do good works." (Catholic-Lutheran JDDJ.)
"It is the will of God for the whole creation that all things should be brought into ultimate unity and communion in Christ." (ARCIC Church, 15; cf 22)
The Holy Spirit "unites local church communities with each other in the one Church of Christ. Within the Church the Spirit is the bond of communion across both space and time." (Methodist-Catholic, Seoul, 58; cf. 59)
There are many, many more examples cited in Kasper's book.
None of the accusations you have made regarding ecumenical dialogue are present. Nothing of the true faith is thrown away, watered down, or otherwise reduced. You are simply ignorant of what the statements actually say and have to create "straw men" to rant and rave about.
And if you don't want representaives of other denominations, such as Bishop Jefferts-Schori, addressing ecumenical conferences, who exactly do you think WILL be present, engaging in the dialogue from the other side...?
At none of the 12 National Workshops I have attended has there been any talk or any movement to an "interim" communion shared by Catholics and Christians of other denominations. Pin, you are talking again from ignorance.
And Pin, I don't answer your questions because you behave, as I have said before, in a childish, churlish manner. You mock, you belittle me personally, the make unsubstantiated accusations, and you resort to using, shall I say, "lavatory language" in this conversation. Grow up, behave like an adult, and we might be able to talk.
Temp, I have emailed Archbishop Gregory's office re: his talk at the NWCU. I will post a link as soon as I can.
Pater, those statements by Kasper are just general statements with really very little actual content. They are very politic and aimed to please. The fact is that Kasper's views are seen as problematic by a number of Catholics involved in dialogue with both secualr groups and Protestant groups.
There is an interim "ecumenical" Communion service at all of these gatherings. It has long been a goal of many of the leaders of ecumenical movements to have such. The Real Presence is the greatest stumbling block for al of them.
My argument, Pater, is not with regard to anything contained in these conferences or with writings emerging from them, or with the dialogue that goes on within them. My point is that the whole movement is ill-conceived to begin with, based upon an entire mindset that the Church cannot (should not) accept. This fact is nicely symbolized by the hyphenated-named married female Episcopal Bishop Jefferts-Schori leading the conference. Please. Give me a break! It does seem that if they were really serious about wooing Catholics to their assemblies they might begin by a less in-your-face approach. Are you really that naive? The Church recognizes all major Protestant denominational Baptisms, shares the Creedal confessions with them, and accepts them as confessing ecclesial communities. That is ecumenical. I really don't see how the Catholic Church can go much further without compromising her identity. Please explain what it is that we can give up. Now, if all these good folks, many of whom are Protestant divinity school types, want to get together once or twice a year and feel good about feeling good toward each other, fine. They get to form committees, compose "joint statements," make a lot of noise (whether it is joyful or not is debatable), and generally feel important and have a good time. But, there are many of us out here who find them difficult to takes seriously.
Now, Pater, you started the ad hominem stuff, remember? You came on here with a chip on your shoulder (which generally indicates wood higher up), and started right in attacking Fr. with your cynical hauteur. Not once have you posted anything instructive for the flock, devotional, or shepherding in any way. Fr. MacDonald's posts, on the other hand, have been full of pastoral and devotional material, confessional aides, reports and pictures of Catholic worship and celebration, and serious efforts to help us understand and better experience both the EF and the OF as encouraged by our Pope. You know, things like a Priest does...you remember those things, don't you?
Here is a fine ecumenical statement from "Unitatis Redintegratio:" "When the obstacles to ecclesial communion have been gradually overcome, all Christians will, at last, in common celebration of the Eucharist, be gathered into the one and only Church in that unity which Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning. We believe that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope thast it will continue to increase until the end of time."
Pin, the statements quoted are not "statements by Kasper." They are quotes from agreed-upon statements that evolved from ecumenical dialogue. These areed-upon statements have Vatican approval.
You were not at the NWCU in Tampa -to claim that you know what happened there re: "iterim communion" is preposterous.
The Church finds Christian unity a worthwhile goal, even if you do not. The Church is committed to working toward this if you are not. The Church desires to engage in dialogue with representatives of other Christian denominations even if you do not. Now I ask you, when it comes to ecumenism and ecumenical dialogue, who knows what ought to be done?
I ask you AGAIN, - what in the passages I quoted from Kasper's book - or from ANY agree-upon statement with Vatican approval, represents "compromising" the identity or belief of Catholic Church? You keep making this claim but provide nothing to support it.
What I post here is intended for the blog discussion, not for any flock or congregation. If you don't like it, don't read it.
I have disagreed with Fr. McDonald and pointed out his errors in fact. I have never - not once - attacked him. You don't like it that I disagree with him and you blow your top, saying un-Christian things and using language unbecoming a gentleman.
I challenge you to quote a single AD HOMINEM statement by me.
Digitially altered pictures of Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori which are clearly intended to mock her and the Episcopal Church in the United States are no aids to devotion. It is shameful that a Catholic priest would act in such a way, especially after he went to great lengths to condemn such practices when they were directed aginst Pope Benedict in his parish newsletter not that long ago. Shameful.
PI, not aware of any digitally altered photos on this blog of the Episcopal bishop? Please direct me.
Tuesday, April 20th
It doesn't matter where the statements came from, they are vague, general statements expressing a future hope. They say nothing about how to get there. Are you denying that there are interim ecumenical communion services at these conferences? They are listed in the schedules for the programs. Catholics do not participate (it is hoped), but people I know in the "ecumenical movement" express a desire for Catholics and other denominations to "commune" together.
Ad hominem is not always, "you are a monkey" or "you have no brains." There are more subtle forms which you employ regularly. I don't know that I have said anything un-Christian. Would you please point it out. Oh, are you one of these like the Baptists who, whenever someone is a little blunt or direct with them, resort to, "Oh, you are just mean and un-Christian. I'm going to pray for you."
If the "flock" or "congregation" is not on this blog discussion then who, pray tell, do you think is on it...Priest.
BTW,Pater,the Episcopal Church in the US has done a fine job of making a mockery of itself and the Gospel. They need no assistance. RE: altered photographs (wherever they are): How do you know that isn't how she really looks?
I guess for me the biggest obstacle to the notion of "Christian Unity" is that I don't understand how a Catholic could get any more unified than to be with Peter. I understand that "the Church" (that being the Catholic Church") could, should and would engage in Ecumenism geared towards convincing other Denominations that Unity means conversion (or return) to "the Church", but there can be no meeting half way, or compromises. I can even understand that the Priests and Bishops entrusted with these ecumenical discussions can not show up, stone wall, scream, rant and rave and say follow me, and expect to get results. But it is essential that the same Priests and Bishops who are being nice and engaging the heretical denominations in these ecumenical discussions clearly know, believe, understand and profess that they really do grasp the whole concept that unity of "the Church" means the conversion of others and not the conversion of Catholics.
Having said all that, is it any wonder the Lay Faithful get confused when we see Bishops from "the Church" making nice and having a conference with heretics, without any clarification by the same that their purpose there is to inform the others of their errors and bring them Home to Rome?
Father McDonald engages in all manner of Ecumenical Activities with local Protestant Denominations, and yet it's clear (and charitably so) what "the Church's" position is when he does so.
Ignotus. Your style and disdain identify you so why use a handle?
Regarding Katharine Jefferts-Schori, whom Pater Ignotus seems to revere and who led the recent NWCU ecumenical conference: She is about as Left wing liberal, both socially and theologically,as you can get. She voted to ordain Gene Robinson, an openly gay and partnered Episcopal "priest, she states that "ecology" is one of her primary concerns, she is encouraging young Episcopal couples not to have children out of "respect to the earth," and she recently gave an Easter sermon with no reference at all to the Resurrection, but rather preached on the "methane gas released by cows that is destroying the atmosphere because of our desire for hamburgers." Folks, the jokes just write themselves. So, Pater, here you have one of your ecumenical leaders...a granola crunching, Patchouli reeking, tree hugging earth biscuit. Yeah, we are really gonna' knock people down getting to the next NWCU seminar. Right. LOL.
Pin, you err. Bishop Jefferts-Schori did not lead the recent NWCU ecumenical conference. She was the preacher at the opening worship service.
I conclude that you misrepresent facts because, when it comes down to it, you have no argument with the facts. So you have to create facts out of thin air in order to have something to rant about.
I do not "revere" Bishop Jefferts-Schori. I respect her position as the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States. Again, you attempt to create a "fact" where none exists to serve your anger.
I know what Bishop Jefferts-Schori looks like - and she most certainly does not look like the photo Fr. McDonald has shamelessly posted on this blog - because I have heard her speak at 3 different conferences and last year sat at table with her at a dinner.
It most certainly does matter a great deal where the statements in Cardinal Kasper's book come from. These agreed upon statements have the recognition and approval of our Church. They faithfully represent our doctrine and dogma. And although you try to dismiss them as inconsequential, I happen to believe that our Church's doctrine and dogma are very important.
Temp, regarding conferences with "heretics," our Church teaches: "Catholic must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments for our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brethren. It is right and salutary to recognize the riches of Christ and virtuos works in the lives of others who are bearing witness to Christ, sometimes even to the shedding of their blood."
If you find scandal in recognizing the presence of God in the separated brothers and sisters, the error is in your heart, not in the hearts of the popes, cardinals, bishops, priests, and laity who do as the Church teaches regarding ecumenical dialogue.
Just to be clear, the photo of the female bishop with our pope in angst is a generic photo and could well represent of one the women "bishops" of the Catholic Church, womanchurch. No where is the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church mentioned in that photo.
Pater, it doesn't matter whether she led the conference or not. She was one of the leaders and delivered she delivered the opening sermon. So, I misstated which leading role she was in. Does that make it less an in your face statement by Left leaning liberal theological/social gospel types? I don't think so. I haven't created any facts. Look 'em up. She is a four alarm head case.
I, too, respect our doctrine and dogma...even the generalized eschatological statements which are diplomatically vague and pitched to a general Christian audience. The hard stuff is more akin to what I posted above from Unitatis and some of the things the Holy Father has stated.
Speaking of seeing only what you want to, it seems that your attributing to Fr. devious motives regarding some generic picture of a woman in a Bishop suit reflects a bit of your own selective perception. Too bad they don't teach Freud anymore...
When asked, "Do you accept Jesus" statement that, 'no one cometh to the Father except by me,' Jefferts-Schori replied, "Well, it is a narrow construction. There are other possibilities." Well,now, there we have it...a staunch ecumenical leader. So, shall we all sing a hymn, perhaps based upon the old Protestant standard, "Blessed Assurance..." "Blessed Assurance, Other Possibilities are mine...."
I'm sure, Pater, that you do not appreciate this ridicule of one you hold in high esteem. However, as Luther taught us, one way of pinching the Devil's tail is to thumb our nose at him...or his minions, as the case may be. I don't think Catholics have any business at these types of ecumenical cabals. Perhaps you were required to be there by the Church, who is sometimes slow to become aware of the abominations in Her midst. So,let us move in hope from the Church lesser informed to the Church better informed. Here are some ecumenical events which I believe are quite significant and far more powerful than so-called ecumenical "solemn assemblies and noisy harps." Scott Hahn's writings, which have won no small number of protestants to the true Church; Karl Braaten, one of the premiere Lutheran theologians in America, and 19 Lutheran seminarians leaving (a couple of years ago) and joining the Holy Catholic Church; Pope Benedict's gracious and open invitation to the true believers in the Episcopal/Anglican Church; Pope John Paul II's entire life and ministry, which brought many Protestants to the Church, Pope Benedict's lifting of the ban on the St.Pius community, the Biblical theology and writings of Timothy Luke Johnson, who has reclaimed Biblical theology and exegisis from the paws of neo-protestantism; and last (and foremost) the writings of Pope Benedict who, as a first rate theologian in his own right, has invited protestant theologians and Biblical scholars everywhere to take another long look at the Holy Catholic Church and its Magisterium. To me, that is true ecumenism that has real punch... putting your evangelical money where your mouth is, so to speak.
Fr. McDonald, the morphed photograph is of Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori. You can see this by looking at her photo at www.episcopalchurch.org/3577_59147_ENG_HTM.htm.
It is inappropriate to use such photographs to mock members of other churches, especially since you yourself condemned the practice in your parish newsletter regarding altered pictures of the pope. Shame on you.
Pin, the fact you created was that Bishop Jefferts-Schori led the recent National Workshop on Christian Unity in April in Tampa. She did not. You were wrong.
The fact that you created was your attempt to attribute to Cardinal Kasper the passages I stated regarding the agreed upon statements between our Church and other Christian denominations. They were not his statements. You were wrong.
I am no devotee of Bishop Jefferts-Schori as you want to believe. I will say again: I respect her position as the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States. Your attitude toward Bishop Jefferts-Schori is your own business and takes no skin off my nose.
PI, in no way does the image on my blog look like The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts-Schori. It simply is not her, but someone else in vestments that are not unique designer vestments solo for Jefferts-Schori, but available to any woman or man who dares, to wear. This is a generic woman bishop and not only the Holy Father's expression is apropos, but also the expression of thousands of Anglicans who feel the same way as the Holy Father. Ecumenism in this regard means identifying with the disillusioned Anglicans over what their so-call leaders are calling them to be.
Fr., I wish you would not even refer to her as "Most Reverend," which she most certainly is not. I find it most instructive that Pater Ignotus, rather than being outraged at her Christology (or lack thereof) or her apostasy, is concerned that the photographer didn't catch her good side in the picture. LOL.. Since when do we care in which disguise unbelief masquerades? "Anyone who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the doctrine has both Father and Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house or give him any greeting; for him who greets him shares his wicked work." II John, 10,11.
Ignotus, you don't listen. I fear the only time you are to be taken seriously is when you are administering the Sacraments...when Christ has control of your mouth.
This is just too good...Ignotus, that isn't a picture of Jefferts-Schori, it is a picture of Nancy Pelosi photoshopped as satire back when she was pretending to be a real Catholic and criticizing the Pope. I find it more than humorous that Fr. innocently posted it not knowing who it was, but you "recognized" it as Jefferts right away. Having trouble keeping your heretics straight in your mind? You are so eager to impugn Fr. MacDonald that you make yourself look like a fool in the process. LOL! Anyway, it looks like something off the roof of Notre Dame Cathedral. I wonder if she casts a shadow or a reflection in the mirror?
Pelosi? Yes, it seems to be the Speaker of the House indeed, wearing The Most Reverend Doctor Katharine Jefferts-Shori's ordination regalia. Pater Ignotus regrets the error. He continues to maintain, however, that if Good Father McDonald is going to complain about photoshopped pix of the pope in his parish newsletter, he ought not post such on his own blog.
NOTE: I acknowledge my error, Pin. Will you do the same re: Bishop Jefferts-Schori at the NWCU and the passages from the agreed upon statements from Cardinal Kasper's book?
Pin, I am concerned about the errors of the Episcopal Church, but that's not the point.
I am not "outraged" at her erroneous aspects of her Christology or any other areas of theological difference we have with non-Catholic Christians. I am not outraged at Presbyterian teachings, Lutheran teachings, or Methodist teachings. I can disagree with other Christians without becoming "outraged."
Rage is violent anger, and violence anger is unhealthy. It is also most unhelpful in the quest for Christian unity.
I thought you knew it was Archbishop Pelosi wearing Almy regalia. Almy is an episcopal catalog club.
Ignotus, I did acknowledge my error in post # 19 and #25 above. Outrage, according to my dictionary, means to be deeply insulted or offended. It has nothing to do with violent anger, as you state. And, yes, you should be outraged at the Episcopal shaman Jefferts-Schori. You mention that you are not outraged at the different theologies of Presbyterians, Lutherans, or Methodists...well, why should you be? They are confessing Christian communities who Baptize in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost and whose bare bones doctrine and theology are not that far from the True Church. The Episcopal church, on the other hand, and Bishop girl in particular, are apostate based upon their stated dogma, policies, and beliefs. You made a good point in one of your earlier posts when you said something to the effect of "recognizing God in separated brothers and sisters." May I suggest that there is a difference in separated brothers and sisters who are either from confessing, creedal Protestant denominations or unchurched altogether, and those who assemble ostensibly in the name of Christ but who, in effect, deny Him or espouse theological positions that are apostate. Unbelief comes in many forms and even the Devil can pronounce the name of the Lord. Whether you are willing to recognize it or not, a huge statement was knowingly made by choosing Ma Jefferts as the preacher. This was also not long after the Gene Robinson affair (sorry...no pun intended)and her participation at the ordination of women priests. If these people in NCWU were really serious about wooing Catholics to their table, they might have chosen a less controversial and divisive person to preach the opening sermon...n'est ce pas?
Pin, the "statement" that was made by the NWCU organizers is that all Christians are welcomed at the National Workshop on Christian Unity. It wasn't a workshop for "Catholic Unity" although from what I see here at times, that might not be a bad idea . . .
Further, the "statement" was made that the organizers respect the office of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States. They and the workshop attendees, myself included, were not endorsing Bishop Jefferts-Schori's positions or statements, as you seem to think.
The choice of Bishop Jefferts-Schori did not discourage Catholics from attending, as you mistakenly assume. In fact, in all the years that I have attended the NWCU, Catholic have, every year, made up close to 50% of the number attending. The Workshop could not exist without Catholic participation. And it is endorsed by every catholic bishop in the cities where it is held.
I doubt if most people attending are aware of Jefferts' theological positions.
I think any tolerance of her or her positions is a de facto endorsement. Further, the Episcopal church is so apostate at this point that the only possible approach to them is the offer that Pope Benedict made...we can only be a lifeboat to rescue the perishing.
Re: Catholic unity and "what you see here at times..." You seem to be the only one on this blog who is out of step.
The Church has little choice, politically, other than to send representatives to these assemblies. Presumably, it is with the belief that it is best to keep open the doors of the Holy Church to those who may be led to make the move into the true Church at some point, rather than with any serious notion of muting or diluting Catholic doctrine or dogma. Undoubtedly, many Catholics attending are of a liberal/social action bent or are merely naive. I suppose it is better to have them inside the tent peeing out than outside it peeing in. Bishops are in the unenviable position of being emissaries to the City of Man.
Pin, rest assured that is is entirely possible to "tolerate" a person whose views are significantly different without "endorsing" that person's views.
I do it with you all the time . . .
Temp: I know that Archbishop Gregory's address to the NWCU was carried in the May 6, 2010, edition of ORIGINS. Maybe you can access it thru the CNS website...?
Pater, you are so kind. As is often the case, if we were talking in person over a cup of coffee or a beer there would be a better rapport...now, back to our regularly scheduled programming...
Post a Comment