“Sunday’s Coming” Movie Trailer from North Point Media on Vimeo.
Not much to add. These guys nailed it.
“Sunday’s Coming” Movie Trailer from North Point Media on Vimeo.
Not much to add. These guys nailed it.
© 2024 Creative Minority Report — Powered by WordPress
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
May 15, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Sal et al, "heretic" does not mean "evil person" or "anti-Catholic". I wish people would stop equating the two to further their own arguments/agendas. Regardless of whatever or how many sect says "we are the true church" they simply do not have the legitimacy to stand up to the unbroken line of apostolic succession by which the truth of the apostles has been passed down for 2,000 years since Pentacost. Those who rant "sola scriptura!" on the one hand blatantly contradict themselves, since Thesalonians 2:15 says very clearly "Hold fast to the TRADITIONS YOU WERE TAUGHT, whether by word or our epistle".
Whatever mental acrobatics you or any others attempt to rationalize the legitimacy of your sect, you cannot get around this. Ergo, if you do not adhere to the traditions of the Apostles (namely, the sacraments– primary among them the Holy Eucharist which is the true body and blood of Our Savior) then you cannot experience the fullness of God, regardless of how much you love Him. This is just plain and simple logic here.
May 15, 2010 at 7:07 pm
When you worship and pray with Sacred music, it is impossible to understand any other way.
http://www.youtube.com/user/123gregorianchant123#p/u/4/OfiM5ELruXw
May 15, 2010 at 7:47 pm
Joan – thanks for that. Wonderful.
For me, I'm equally at home with our beautiful Latin rite as I am with the other legitimate rites/traditions such as:
The Syriac
Ethiopic (note: try NOT to feel the spirit here : )
Coptic etc
I think this is a big point many Protestants miss. We are not being ethnocentric or myopic by criticizing their way of worship. It simply is not legitimate. They have lost the essence of liturgy which has been passed down unbroken THROUGHOUT THE WORLD for 2000 years. And this is a shame.
May 15, 2010 at 8:11 pm
An excellent book is Liturgy and Personality. It reminds us that worship must be directed to the Holy Trinity. If we focus on ourselves it becomes the most insidious idolatry in which we think we are worshiping God, but are only entertaining ourselves.
May 15, 2010 at 8:22 pm
This is a "big point" Early Riser" in the modern Catholic Church also.
But Restoration IS happening.
Our youth Masses and the New Mass are just too protestant due to modernism.
We all need to embrace Traditional Catholicism… especially starting in the Catholic Church first.
Listen to the beautiful video posted on The AnchoressOnline:Veni,creator Spiritus and you will find nothing more beautiful:Holy and Sacred.
May 15, 2010 at 8:39 pm
Joan – totally agreed.
Cestus!!! Is this the same CestusDei from that horrible bastion of liberal modernist clap-trap Beliefnet?? Run by that porcine Episco-wiccan Martha??? Long time no see, Father!!!!!
May 15, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Hello, Early Riser. I was up early this morning, too. I'm pretty sure if we were neighbors we'd be friends, and I'm sure not trying to pick a fight. As my first post acknowledged, you folks in the Roman Catholic Church have a wonderful faith tradition which is intellectually consistent, extremely well thought out, and without which none of us protestants, restorationists, or anybody else (at least on the western side of things) would have a theological leg to stand on. I'm a big fan. That said, when Paul wrote to the Thessalonians, the traditions of which he spoke were not yet the Roman Catholic Liturgy, nor do you find any inkling of the Christians at Corinth, or Ephesus, or even Rome partaking of the eucharist as currently understood in sacramental terms. Throughout the first century, at least until the fall of Rome (and I would possibly even argue up into the early 2nd century), the doctrines were still being written. Baptism by sprinkling/pouring (including infant baptism), ordination of priests (or celibacy of priests), singular bishops arranged in hierarchical fashion as opposed to multiple bishops/elders/overseers at the local level–none of these innovations appear in the apostolic church described in scripture. For that reason, some in my tradition (and please know, I disagree with them) would see your Thessalonians and raise you a Mark 7:6-8 ("In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men."). The million-dollar question is whether Matthew 16:18 gives Peter and his successors the authority to create traditions on a par with inspired scripture. People have been having that argument for a good 500 years, and I doubt we'll solve it online today. However, please know that (a) I consider you a brother in Christ, and (b) despite my attempts to show my Christianity by my love for my brothers (regardless of which of us is error), that doesn't mean I embrace an "anything goes" theology that says sincerity in error trumps all (should we sin more that grace may abound? By no means!). If I shared your premises, I would certainly be Catholic. If you started with mine, I'll bet you'd be at least a deacon in your local congregation of the Church of Christ. Neither of us is being willfully blind or illogical. Regardless, I look forward to stopping in occasionally to this site.
May 15, 2010 at 8:53 pm
WOW! Spot on! That is Mars Hill Church in Seattle. Home of the incurably hip.
May 15, 2010 at 9:08 pm
Sal – thanks so much for the comments and sentiment. We will absolutely have to disagree here that the sacraments, specifically Holy Eucharist, was not in place at the time St Paul wrote his epistles. There is archeological evidence contrary to your position in the Roman catacombs which date to the 2nd century; shortly following the visits of Sts Peter and Paul when Christianity metastasized in Rome. And once again, the same practice was present in the East as far as India and as far South as Sudan in Africa; both places far beyond the reach of the Roman Empire, but not the apostles. It is unfathomable that such practices could have simply arisen in a vacuum.
And I know you were not arguing, but simply stating a point on how some use Matthew 16:18 to prove their legitimacy. But the question comes down to this; who exactly is trying to prove legitimacy? The leaders of a church founded less than 200 years ago?
Anyway, enjoy your weekend.
May 15, 2010 at 9:09 pm
@Coach Sal…
I too am in a Church that comes from the Stone-Campbell Movement. How can anybody who Is a member of the Churches of Christ claim they are the only Christians?
To those who are unfamiliar, the tenets of the Stone-Campbell movement are as follows:
1)We are not the only Christians, but we are Christians only.
2)Where the Bible speaks we speak; where the Bible is silent, we are silent.
3)In essentials unity; in opinions liberty; in all things love.
Also, nice to se everybody, hello, and good to be here!
May 15, 2010 at 9:11 pm
THE ONE TRUE CHURCH:
http://www.olrl.org/apologetics/one_church.shtml
May 15, 2010 at 9:39 pm
Riser, can you send me a link about that evidence? As a church history nerd, I know I'd be fascinated by that. By the way, I had the opportunity a few years ago to visit the catacombs and about 27 of Rome's churches. WONDERFUL.
And my fellow Geek, I know exactly what Stone and Campbell said about "not the only Christians, but Christians only." Sadly, we poor fallen people tend to get parochial pretty quickly. That's why I don't exactly describe myself as a member of the "Church of Christ" (which, as Riser correctly points out, has only existed in its current form for 200 years). I am a Christian, period. And I choose to worship with a congregation of the Church of Christ and to place myself under the discipline of their leadership.
Finally, Joan, thanks for the link. I'll read it and perhaps comment later.
May 15, 2010 at 9:50 pm
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS DIFFERENT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVr7Mc6KP8o
http://www.youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV#p/a/f/1/MN8HvBKFylo
May 16, 2010 at 12:58 am
joan, I see my legend lives on lol. Yes, it is the one and the same. There is no other. I did make a brief visit back to beliefnet just to say hello last year.
May 16, 2010 at 12:59 am
Actually I think that post was for early riser.
May 16, 2010 at 1:45 am
Cestus – Well, it sure is great to see you. I was actually a moderator on that board just to wreak havoc on "Martha's Minions" both in the Catholic AND the Mohammedan debate boards. I was disgusted at how the anti-Catholics (heretics, atheists and anyone in between with a bone to grind) got carte blanche to bash and say anything they wanted, and even as a moderator there was nothing we could do about it. So, after I unveiled myself I left and never went back. If you ever want a kick, google Martha Ainsworth and you'll see what we were up against.
Anyway, good to see you, Father. Pax Domini tecum.
May 16, 2010 at 2:04 am
Sal – Read the Didache (it's not difficult or lengthy) and then go Here.
May 16, 2010 at 5:20 am
Seeing an actual mosh pit for Christ (complete with stage diving) at a youth "Worship" service got me wondering…
Being told that baptism was just symbolic and that it really didn't do anything got me reading…
Reading John 6 several times very slowly and deliberatley got me back to the confessional after 33 years.
-Tim-
May 16, 2010 at 5:17 pm
early, oh I knew who was after me. I did think it was strange since thousands of people read by posts and you would think they would like the numbers. But bigotry knows no bounds. It was fun while it lasted.
Cestusdei
May 16, 2010 at 10:09 pm
Thanks, Early Riser. I actually was familiar with Didache, although in the 20-ish years since I last read it, I was unaware that it is now being possibly dated earlier. Once again, it comes down to premises. If extracanonical books "count" for purposes of establishing doctrine, then Didache is a fine piece of evidence for an early, possibly even late-1st century practice involving the Eucharist and also baptism by pouring. Of course, as a Catholic, I would expect you to accept it (after all, you guys often buy a Bible with the Apocrypha tacked on). However, 1st John points out that there are already innovations that cross the line into heresy by even the late first century (Gnosticism being the most obvious example). And I would bet that you and I both share a similarly low opinion of the whole Da Vinci Code business. And on the other end of the spectrum, you've got folks (like the Campbellites from whom my congregation descend) who will deny any source except for the Bible, possibly even tacking on an out-of-context Revelation 22:18 admonition not to add anything to the book. Both sides are trying to be "better safe than sorry," whether by sticking to the tradition of 2000 years or by attempting to get "back to basics." One thing I have been noticing in John lately is that he talks a lot about holding to the faith we've had from the beginning, but never gets around to telling us where to draw the line on that beginning point. He instead keeps coming back to love (1 John 3:11, for example). I'm pretty sure he gets that from our Lord, who distills the whole law down to love of God and love of neighbor.
Please understand, my nit-picking over the "what is heresy" question isn't even directed at you, or at Roman Catholics. It's a pet peeve I picked up when I was first exposed to people in my faith tradition who drew boundaries that would place you (with your 2000 years of faith) outside the line. And I am terribly serious about orthodoxy–being ecumenical doesn't solve every theological issue (Mormonism, for example). I'm just trying to apply a little Matthew 7:2. One day, if Christ judges me by the standard I used, I want that standard to be as merciful as possible.
With the work-week coming, I doubt I'll be so verbose from here on out. Thanks for welcoming a new guy to the Creative Minority.