The Sci Fi Catholic Yak Module
I think there is a significant difference between those who disagree with Catholicism and anti-Catholic bigots who say things about the Catholic Church that often they know is incorrect. That even when challenged by others and shown that they are factually incorrect will still go own to make the same assertions in the future. People like Dave Hunt and Chuck Hagee are of these sort who inflame hatred against the Church.
The irony is that John McCain condemned then Gov. Bush for speaking at Bob Jones University.
Well, I think it's probably a good thing to have people say this in a public forum, rather than spout anti-Catholic venom from their pulpit without anyone else knowing what they teach.
Still, yest. I got a pre-release notification from Amazon for a Catholic book & was appalled at the way it had already been tagged by HUNDREDS of people, including "crazy" and "cult." Don't these people have anything better to do?
And I have to agree 100% about Luther--every time I read Luther, I want to jump & down and say, "read your contemporary, Julian of Norwich! Believe in God's mercy, already!"
I don't know if everyone understands that what Hagee is preaching is standard Fundamentalist doctrine. When I was a Fundamentalist, I was taught the same stuff. For a history of views on Revelation and the imagery therein, I highly recommend Antichrist by Bernard McGuinn. According to McGuinn, the view that the papacy is Antichrist and that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon is an original Protestant doctrine and was considered dogma by early Protestants. Based on what I've seen here, I don't see Hagee as any more "anti-Catholic" than any other Protestant, and I consider him more honest, forthright, and, in the sense of holding to the teachings of his sect, orthodox, than many.
I'd hate to have it assumed that all non-Catholic Christians must hold the same ignorant mis-informed understanding of the Catholic Church and the Bible as that held by Hagee. His is strictly a conservative fundamentalist view. I'm not Catholic but certainly don't subscribe to Hagee's beliefs.
"The only sound reason for a Protestant to be Protestant is to have a viewpoint such as Hagee's."
Being a member of the United Methodist Church, which is a split from the Church of England, and holding a viewpoint quite different from Hagee's, I just have to wonder how you're defining "protestant."
I enjoy your blog, btw. I subscribe through a news reader. Thanks!
AMERICA HAS BEEN BLESSED WITH GUIDANCE IN PASTOR HAGEE'S EXCITING WORD OF PROPHECY:
"John McCain is a man of principle."
SO TRUE!!!! SO TRUE!!!! SO TRUE!!!!
A MAN OF PRINCIPLE!!! A MAN OF PRINCIPLE!!! A MAN OF PRINCIPLE!!!
PASTOR HAGEE'S ENDORSEMENT ALSO VINDICATES AND AFFIRMS AMERICAPHILE'S ANALYIS!!!!
NOW, AMERICA'S GREATEST PRESIDENT NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BEAUTIFUL COULTER PLAN FOR MIDDLE EAST STABILITY!!! WHAT A BEAUTIFUL GIFT TO SENATOR MCCAIN, TO AMERICA, TO ISRAEL AND TO THE PEOPLE OF IRAN WHO ARE COMPLETELY UNAWARE ABOUT THE COMING RAPTURE!!!
MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD IS THE PERSIAN PIAPS!!!!
STRIKE NOW, MR. PRESIDENT, AND SPREAD FREEDOM!!!!
THANK YOU, PASTOR HAGEE, FOR EXPOSING POPERY!!!!!
REMEMBER, THE ROMAN POPE HAS BEEN EXPOSED AS AN AGENT OF PIAPS!!!!
THANK YOU, TOO, FOR READING AMERICAPHILE!!!!
THE IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS PROVIDED BY AMERICAPHILE CAN BE FOUND NOWHERE ELSE!!!
ALSO, THE MORNING AFTER IS A POWERFUL TOOL FOR WITNESSING AND PREPARING SERMONS!!!!
SENATOR MCCAIN, PLEASE READ THIS EXCITING FACT-BASED ONLINE NOVEL YOURSELF!!!! A PRINTOUT HAS BEEN SENT TO YOUR CAMPAIGN HEADQUARTERS!!! IT IS WHAT EVERY CANDIDATE NEEDS TO INFORM AN INTELLEGENT FOREIGN POLICY!!!!
THANKS AGAIN, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN PASTOR JOHN HAGEE!!!
SEE YOU ALL AT THE RAPTURE!!!!!
Divers and Sundry, thanks for your comments. You have a good point; I suppose a Protestant may need only to be critical of Catholicism in order to remain a Protestant, and may not necessarily need to see the Church as the Whore of Babylon. But division in the Church is serious business; to break off from one church and form another, somebody better have a serious beef. A beef on the level of "That church is the Whore of Babylon" seems to me just about right. I'm reasonably certain this was an Anglican viewpoint back in the day. As for the Methodists, I don't know.
And Ralph...is that a parody?
In the best and most civil tradition of theological debate:
Luther effectively denied the possibility of consciously accepting co-operative grace; Calvin took the further step of denying co-operative grace itself. But the "ekklesia" is the product of co-operative grace, not merely of operative grace. No one receives Jesus Christ without the struggle to cast off the former self, even those baptized as infants. Concupiscence remains in the will. Thus, in the denial of co-operative grace, the committed Calvinist must also deny the Church, which has historically taken the form of hatred of the Catholic Church - both because the Catholic CHurch is in fact the Church willed by Christ (even if other denominations remain partially attached), and because the Catholic Church is the most obvious ecclesial community for Calvinists to pin their defective theology over against. What I find particularly ironic is that the current efforts among various Calvinist denominations to develop an ecclesiology is leading most of them to reconsider practically all the points on which these traditions diverge from Rome, starting with the life issues, and advancing to date as far as a very-nearly-sacrament of marriage and a very-nearly-acceptance of Mariology. Of course, this is predictably enough only going to make the most die-hard Calvinists that much more vitriolic.
Whence, to paraphrase the Council of Trent:
"I don' hold with all thisheah schismatizin'. I'll just be warmin' up the ol' mace of office; set warheads for "auto-murtilize"..."
Er, I mean, welcome home.
"A beef on the level of "That church is the Whore of Babylon" seems to me just about right."
The more polite way to put that one, of course, is, "That church does not recognize the fact that Christ's church does not need a hierarchal government; rather, it prefers to establish an organized government so it can ally itself with other nations."
Though, as a personal preference, I wouldn't leave the Catholic Church to espouse so civil a view. I'd prefer to find a place where I could yell all sorts of nasty things about Holy Mother Church. (So if I don't show up at mass one Sunday, check the Angry Atheists for Anarchy meetings, or the nearest radical mosque.)
Histor
"to break off from one church and form another, somebody better have a serious beef."
Methodists were established in America by John Wesley (who remained a Church of England priest all his life) after the Church of England recalled its priests because of our little colonial rebellion. Sometimes it's more politics than theology that splits groups, and the theologies can be closer that folks realize. Once the administrative structures are established it's very hard to reunite.
Anglican groups as a whole are much closer to Catholic theology than to the type of fundamentalist hyper-conservativism that Hagee represents. I realize that sounds very relative to Catholics, but it's a big deal to those of us who don't like being grouped with Hagee and his ilk.
Also, I think independent congregational groups like Hagee's have no conception of The Church with a capital "C" and are totally individualist in their approach to Christian theology. They don't have a real tradition in any meaningful sense of the word and are dependent then on their own or their pastor's idiosyncratic interpretations of the Bible. In that sense they themselves are as cult-like as they claim the Catholic Church to be.
I agree whole-heartedly with what Divers and Sundry posted about Protestants. I don't think that all Protestants should be grouped togethor with Hagee's views or that we have some "beef" with the Catholic church or Catholics in general for that matter. Because, as a Protestant, I certainly don't.
Anglican groups as a whole are much closer to Catholic theology than to the type of fundamentalist hyper-conservativism that Hagee represents. I realize that sounds very relative to Catholics, but it's a big deal to those of us who don't like being grouped with Hagee and his ilk.
No, that is not relative to Catholics, but quite important. Theological differences can be subtle yet vital. In my statements, I forgot to consider the Anglicans (and Methodists, for though I knew not their history that you have kindly summarized, I knew they derived from Anglicanism), whose history is separate from if related to that of those who followed Luther and Calvin. Mea culpa.
This doesn't mean I intend to change the essence of my comments; I still see no excuse for a Christian being outside the communion of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches unless he has some pretty big beefs, but Hagee is perhaps not the best example, as readers are pointing out, of the sort of beefs a Protestant must have.
Still, at the same time, the (very) little I've seen of Hagee does not appear to me vitriolic. He is merely preaching--calmly--the doctrines of his sect, the same doctrines I was formerly taught before I 180'd my opinions on the subject. Perhaps it appears so mild to me because I am used to it.
"Still, at the same time, the (very) little I've seen of Hagee does not appear to me vitriolic. He is merely preaching--calmly--the doctrines of his sect..."
The doctrines themselves are also vitriolic, however calmly they may be preached.
"I still see no excuse for a Christian being outside the communion of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches unless he has some pretty big beefs"
Well, but it's not like the Catholics and Orthodox are actively proselytizing among the protestants, and most non-Catholics have no idea what y'all believe. The non-Catholic public doesn't usually even visit Catholic and Orthodox churches.
You seem to think that non-Catholics are rejecting Catholicism outright when it is more that most have never considered Catholicism to begin with.
Non-Catholics just really don't know much about it except when they hear something in the news. Hagee's false statements and vitriolic beliefs (I agree with Smiter the Archdeacon) are poisonous in this regard. It may be all some people hear.
Not that he doesn't have the right to voice his beliefs... He's just so _loudly_ wrong.
As a former Calvinist myself (Presbyterian Church USA) in the great left coast state of California, we were not particularly taught in our Sunday School classes that the Catholic Church was wrong. As a woman I held offices as Deacon and Elder, which are really more administrative than anything. Many of the prayers and liturgy are the same. However, after visiting churches in the MidwEst and East Coast the left coast churches were much too far to the left in many ideas... especially concerning ordination of homosexuals and divorced people in the ministry. I believe at that time (late 60's early 70's) that people were leaving the church in droves so much of the hard-core Calvinistic doctrine was being watered down. That in turn caused even more folks to leave and us young people with little sense of identity of what the church was really about. And we DEFINITELY had our share of scandals on the local level, so the priest scandal in the Catholic Church was old news. One of our minister's wife left him for another woman, another minister's wife was a hard-core alcholic and would be totally wasted when she read the scripture...another minister's teen-age son was a hard-core druggie and another teen-age daughter got pregnant....what crosses they had to bear when they stood up in the pulpit and tell the congregation what was going on so as to squash all the rumors. As a young person I was always seeking MORE that the Presbyterian church did not provide which lead me to the Catholic Church... but that is a topic for a conversion story
Maybe Deej can ghost-write it for me some day as he is excellent with the pen.
Sara--Sounds like a great read to me! I do RCIA, so I never get tired of the genre ('though over at the web site where I read D.G.'s I couldn't help but notice almost no one talks about what happened in RCIA as part of their story.)
I wish there were a forum for stories of how lukewarm, dissenting Catholics become orthodox firebrands, 'cause I would write mine.
Xena--
RCIA was not a big deal for me as I had heavily studied Catholicism for almost ten years. So the material was not new. I had attended Mass for many years and my Catholic friends tutored me in several area, especially the Real Presence. And in many ways, because Presbyterianism is an "OLD" Protestant church--in other words, formed shortly after the Reformation--much of the theology was the same. The authority of the Pope and other such things I had no problem accepting, as no matter what, you do have to have a responsible authority...that is how the world workds in life, business, government, and religion. I was ready, and was for many years, but in my area it was hard to find a class that fit into my busy schedule. I don't pretend to fully know or understand everything, but the more I read and speak to people and study, the more I learn.
After mulling it over, sleeping on it, and thinking about the thoughtful comments everyone has made, I've decided to return to the original position I had when I first put this post up.
Well, but it's not like the Catholics and Orthodox are actively proselytizing among the protestants...
That's not true. Both Catholics and Orthodox have been evangelizing Protestants, and there have been significant conversions of Evangelicals to both Catholicism and Orthodoxy in the U.S. in recent years. And if Catholics just let me mind my own business, I wouldn't be here, either.
That's not to say I don't partly agree with your point. Evangelism and catechesis are both in need of massive overhaul in the Church if they are to be more vibrant and more effective. In order for that to happen, I grudgingly agree with the Traditionalists that a lot of anathemas need to be leveled at liberal theologians and busybodies.
I agree also that Protestants need to learn about Catholicism. A certain Baptist has a fine book on that subject, entitled A Primer on Roman Catholicism for Protestants. I highly recommend it; it might accidentally make you Catholic. Protestants should not only know about Catholicism because knowledge thereof is part of a good education (or because it would enable them to convert to it), but because they ought to know just what it is they're protesting against, as you pointed out.
I should clarify that my criticism in the original post of Billy Graham and others is directed only at Protestants who really know about Catholicism and have high opinions of it, yet remain Protestants. It is them that I disapprove. The Protestants who simply don't know need education so they can form their opinions. Protestants like Michael Horton, who make sharp criticisms of Catholicism, have my respect because they are really, clearly, definitely separated from the Church and can give reasons why, and those reasons have to do with vital matters of doctrine. They are also, as has been pointed out by many others, closer to Catholicism in spirit than are those aforementioned liberal Catholic theologians.
My comment about the need for an overhaul of catechesis, incidentally, ties into Xena Catolica's comment that converts don't speak much of RCIA. I'm sure Xena runs an excellent program, but RCIA in general is in need of the same serious overhaul. For many ex-Protestants coming into the Church, RCIA is an irritant: it is a collection of vague, wishy-washy, half-embarrassed, dumbed-down, largely incorrect summaries of Catholic doctrine. Many RCIA classes probably do more to shake the faith of the converts than to build it. We don't speak much of RCIA because some of us have little good to say about it.
I said, "Well, but it's not like the Catholics and Orthodox are actively proselytizing among the protestants..."
You responded, "That's not true."
I recant then and restate it in terms of my own personal experience: I haven't seen any Catholic proselytizing around here and have never experienced it personally.
Mileage varies, of course, and I shouldn't have made such a generalization from my own experience.
I understand that Hagee has made a statement claiming he is not at all anti-Catholic. Interesting.
I believe that RCIA has the most difficult job of trying to condense the Catholic faith into a series of classes that often have to address individuals of various degrees of faith and knowledge. Here in Utah we deal alot with converts from the LDS (Latter-Day Saint) faith,so you have to start from square zero in redefining terminology. You have the other extreme where you have the folks who had LOTS of Catholic religious education as a youth, but maybe due to life circumstances--such as a move-- never received Confirmation. I was somewhere in the middle but had both extremes in my class. I personally felt it would have been nice to have some kind of textbook or workbook besides the Catechism..I learn best that way. I would also recommend anyone in RCIA to watch Fr. Corapi's series on the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It clarified alot for me, although he may be a bit blunt and a bit over the head for some beginners. When you're a baby you need to have ground baby food as you have no teeth to chew steak.
I'm not out pounding on people's doors..but when the sweet Mormon missionaries are sicced on me (welfare visits by my most caring Mormon neighbors) we always pray a decade of the Rosary first before I permit them to say their piece. So that way they can see the Scriptures surrounding the Rosary. I even give them a mission rosary and a phamplet on how to say the Rosary. I know that Our Blessed Mother is planting a few seeds
I also have a Catholic Calendar at work, with a Rosary and a small picture of the Divine Mercy, the Blessed Mother, and Pope Benedict XVI on my desk. I also wear my crucifix visible when I can.No one has complained. Low- key witnessing--but still seed planting..
D.G.-I believe you! Agree about overhaul 100%!! Catechumens, Candidates, and adult Confirmandi are supposed to be in seperate formation, but as you've doubtlessly noticed, most parishes aren't swimming in adult formation catechists, much less mystagogues. The Catechism is Not supposed to be used as a pastoral text. And most cradle Catholics don't "speak Protestant."
But rather than elaborate, let me ask--if your parish wanted to have seperate formation for Protestant converts, would you be willing to help out with it?
I would, yes. What you say about "speaking Protestant" is interesting. I haven't noticed a great deal of difference in terminology between Catholics and Protestants myself, but I think that's because I sort of slid into the Catholic terminology and got used to it over time. Also, I probably to some extent still speak more Protestant than Catholic myself.
Sara, what you say about praying the rosary with the Mormon missionaries is interesting. I don't think that would have occurred to me: I declined to pray a rosary with a Catholic who invited me to when I was Protestant, and would assume other Protestants, and also Mormons, would likewise decline.
Deej--
I get about 50-50..especially if I invite them "Would you like to lead??" The ones who will pray the Rosary are interested mainly on how to missionary to Catholics--however the seed is planted...and many are amazed on how tied to the Scripture the Rosary is. I even had one young missionary return to have me teach him how to pray the entire Rosary--all 20 decades...perhaps a future priest??
One time though a couple of missionaries were playing hard ball with one of my coworkers--a single guy-- who was raised in the South and very much a polite gentleman..and finds it difficult to be rude to them. He had an appointment and asked me to be there to scare them off. I asked them to pray the Rosary with us...except I have a version given to me years ago that had a prayer, a scripture reading, a meditation, and a hymn after EACH Hail Mary!! It's wonderful for a personal meditation for like one decade, especially during Lent or Advent or during a personal retreat, but a complete 5 decade Rosary would take around an hour and a half.. they soon got bored, announced they had another appointment, and left. They haven't been back since. Afterwards my friend asked "Are Rosaries REALLY that long??" Nope--that's just the long-play version.. "
The doctrines themselves are also vitriolic, however calmly they may be preached.
Well, I’m an atheist and I’m with Smiter the Archdeacon there. I was raised Protestant and I’m no Snow White of Tolerance as you’ll see but I’ve had it up to here with the “They’re not” [“they” being Catholics, Lutherans, the Amish, Christian Scientists, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, you name it] Christians.” Zeus playing ping-pong, what a waste of energy. You want to know who’s not a Christian? Me. Anyone disagree with that? 
So pile on.
At one time John McCain had the courage – the moral courage – to call out these hatemongers for who they are. Now he’s smarming up to Hagee and wearing a costume at Bob Jones University and tap dancing with the man (although I think that may have been a deliberate stunt, being “late” )who called him not a “real” soldier for being a prisoner of war. Here was a man I could have voted for at one time! What has happened to John McCain? I’m afraid to ask my Republican friends about it. I’m afraid they might start crying.
You’re kind to not insult Hagee but the sad truth is, these people are unpleasant on a daily basis. If you ask them questions in a respectful manner, you’re “attacking” them. They have the truth, and the truth is their God is mean and exclusionary, and that’s just how it is. They’re the type who exhort their children not to tell ghost stories around the campfire, who are on the lookout for chanting and dancing in their kids (it’s the devil, you know). No they don't visit Catholic churches or learn what others believe, because they won't. That's temptation. Too many of them can’t appreciate art or music or poetry and have zippity-doo-dah for an imagination. It’s just sad. And here I am going to a Catholic grad school. Wow, it’s nice to share ideas with believers who aren’t, you know, ignorant. Seriously, what a relief. But me associating with Catholics is just going to confirm some peoples biases, so... *shrug*
Kristine--
My sis-in-law is atheist and I just spent the last week on pins and needles around her. EVERYTHING in my house was offensive to her to the point that I flat out told her and my brother that if you don't like MY house--there's the door (they were invited houseguests). My brother is a lapsed Catholic but I absolutely cannot believe how he puts up with her insulting behavior.( can we say PW'd in your forum Deej??) I'm sure she has her reasons for being atheist but she sure does have the ax to grind about ANYONE with ANY kind of religious beliefs. She really got torqued when I left for church Sunday morning. In many ways I pity her for the resentment and bitterness she carries.
I even had to take down my Raphael angels I had in the guest bedroom and the angel potteries in the bathroom. The rest of the house remained as is--stood my ground on that part. And I wasn't about to remove my crucifix or not say the blessing at our meals. And she had nothing but totally MEAN things to say about my Carmelite formation. It is very very obvious that she is totally consumed by the treasures of this world instead of the treasures of the next.
Thank you for sharing your views in our forum. It sounds like we can have a rational discussion which is what I really need right now..
can we say PW'd in your forum Deej?
The only comments I delete are spam and flaming. So far, I have deleted some spam but have never had to delete real comments or block a commenter. I think you're safe.
My view on this matter, though I am open to persuasion, is that the ideas are not really intolerable if the people can be civil and behave civilly. Now, I've never met John Hagee and don't know if it's true that he gets angry when asked calm, straight-forward questions. That wasn't my experience of such people when I was one of them and hung around them on a regular basis.
Your example also indicates that it is possible, though by no means necessary, for an atheist to have the same kind of attitude. I am not Buddhist, but I certainly wouldn't demand that my host take down Buddhist decorations while I was in his house. It isn't necessary for an atheist to demand that Christian decorations be taken down, either. I rather doubt if John Hagee would demand that Catholic decorations be taken down. Having certain opinions, even wrong opinions, doesn't necessarily make you an intolerable person.
And welcome to the blog, Kristine. Thanks for adding your thoughts.
DG says: "My view on this matter... is that the ideas are not really intolerable if the people can be civil and behave civilly."
Ideas, I would say, may or may not be tolerable, depending on factors like their intelligibility, coherence, basis, implications, and context. I think it true that "Error has no rights;" and this means exactly that intolerable ideas need not, in fact, be tolerated.
But, the people who espouse even intolerable ideas are always to be tolerated, indeed loved, qua persons. The appropriate response to a person who espouses intolerable ideas therefore includes the minimum level of force necessary to prevent him from doing harm to others, and (as far as possible) to himself as well.
If that person is civil in his espousing of intolerable ideas, the "minimum force" probably doesn't include any physical response; social conventions may be adequate to the task of containing the harm implicitly present in the intolerable ideas. But if that person is uncivil, some level of physical restraint or intervention may be necessary.
For example, in Sara's post above, the sister-in-law's idea that Sara is not merely mistaken, but culpably mistaken, in having faith, is an intolerable idea, fundamentally because it does not admit equality between Sara and the sister-in-law. The idea explicitly devalues Sara's experience of being human and contingent on God, and thus implicitly dehumanizes her. Still, civility might mitigate the effect of this idea. The sister-in-law agreeing not to "grind her axe" during the visit would constitute social containment of the intolerable idea. But if one imagined the sister-in-law to be extremely uncivil, in, say, actually breaking the religious art in Sara's house, a physical response such as demanding her departure and remuneration for the damage might be in order.
In other words, ideas always have to be judged and tested critically; people have to be loved to the full extent that they themselves permit us (finite, broken as we also are) to love them.
Sara, re your atheist sister-in-law: there's one in every family. Full oft must I yet smite mine own brother excessively, moved by charity for the soul he professes not to have, yet he does not repent... Alas, I understand it not.
Wonderful comments Smiter...
Alas I do fear for my brother's immortal soul and pray for him daily. He has indeed been caught up in the materialism of this world,whereas the more I grow spiritually the less material things I require. They have many expensive things yet they are unhappy, and perhaps they are jealous of my happiness. I do pray that he will return to the Sacraments, but I sadly realize that as long as she is in the picture that will not happen.
Geez, Sara, your sister-in-law sounds pretty reactionary. Her reaction seems harsh (though I get tired of angel items, because they’re everywhere). I have a relative who’s Jehovah’s Witness and she’s like that – they don’t believe in images, religious art, birthdays, Christmas, etc., or even in singing well – you think I’m kidding but I’m not. Until I moved recently I had a bunch of saints candles all over the place and lots of images of Mary. You see, I played a woman in an independent (very independent) film who collected Mary images, and after shooting my former boyfriend and I just kept that stuff around. We were both raised Lutheran so it was new (and in our childhoods, verboten) to us, but I love art and looking at icons (though not crucifixes really), and I’ve made an effort to learn about different religions and to meet people. I wonder how much of it is a personality thing but, as I said, certain Protestant religions are very insular.
DG says: "My view on this matter... is that the ideas are not really intolerable if the people can be civil and behave civilly."
Ideas, I would say, may or may not be tolerable..."Error has no rights;" and this means exactly that intolerable ideas need not, in fact, be tolerated.
But, the people who espouse even intolerable ideas are always to be tolerated...
You're right, of course, Smiter. I must have been under a brain-freeze when I wrote that. What I should have said is that I have as yet seen no evidence of Hagee expressing his ideas in an intolerable manner, nor have I seen evidence of him saying anything that would lead logically to, say, violence against Catholics, and therefore no restraint would seem to be necessary.
Commenting by HaloScan
