Saturday, May 18, 2013

AGENTS OF CONTROL - 2nd hour Saturday program




I'm sometimes sent interesting books for review.  One of them was sent by Pastor John DeJacomo, a friend of Dr. Stanley Monteith.  It is AGENTS OF CONTROL.  I invited Pastor DeJacomo to share his perspective on current world events particularly as they related to scriptural prophecy.  He will be with me the second hour.  His book covers many of the same issues I covered over the years.   We will have open lines for those who wish to call in and ask  questions.  Please join us for both hours.

I'm currently working on an extensive article about current New Age infiltration of Roman Catholic circles among Catholic sisters -- not only in the USA, but many other places, including Australia where it appears to be particularly blatant.

Tune in and stay tuned!

CONSTANCE
Comments:
Chapter 9 of this book was particularly well done -- it dealt with the "Emergent Church" issues.

Constance
 
Although I've had my issues with Bjorn Freiberg ("Farmer"), he is doing an excellent job of keeping up with Javier Solana who continues to be a "person of interest."

Constance
 
If you are going to do a piece on Catholic nuns and New Age, I hope you will ask for the input of those very informed Catholics such as Susanna who follow this blog. You are not a Catholic so you have no real perspective on what is going on inside that community.
 
You assume more than you know. However, Susanna's valued input is always welcome and invited. I have a very real perspective on that scene and have been briefed by the finest and best since 1981 -- 2 years before you and I ever talked. My mentors included Fr. Eduard Perrone (founder of A Call to Holiness); Fr. Vincent Miceli (author of THE ANTICHRIST); Malachi Martin; Fr. John O'Connor (who exposed the peophilia scandal long before anybody else ever spoke out on it, etc., etc.

Constance
 
Oh, and I forgot Fr. Paul Marx (founder of HLI - Human Life International) and Fr. John Hardon, S.J., who had the wrath of his order, but the blessings of the Pope in drafting the updated catechism of the Roman Catholic Church.
 
AND, one of my closest long-time friends is a Religious Sisters of Mercy nun and I hear regularly from other nuns who give me input as to their observations.
 
I am still interested in what Javier Solana has to say and you can go to his blog site where he posts opinions and news on different issues going on around the world. You know he is also now a "Senior Fellow" in the Brookings Institute. By the way if his posts are in spanish I just go to Google Translate for the english. Here is his site.

http://javiersolana.esadeblogs.com/
 
Dear John Rupp:

Valuable tips for all. He is also now heading the Aspen Institute for Spain and has more high level activities taking place than one can shake a stick at, including heading the European defense strategy organizations.

Constance
 
Most Catholics do not approve of the anti-Immigrant policies of the Tea Parties.
 
Dear Constance,

First of all, thank you for your kind words.

If Father John Hardon has been one of your advisor/mentors, then you have chosen your mentors wisely indeed.

The cause for Father Hardon's beatification is well underway in the Roman Catholic Church!

Best Regards,

Susanna

P.S. One of my best friends is the prioress of a cloistered Dominican monastery. They are affiliated with people who are associated with EWTN. As far as I know, there are no New Age ties with these? religious.....which is the reason I even bother to mention them here.

However,this does not necessarily mean that there is no apostasy among those members of Catholic religious communities who apostatise while calling themselves "Catholic."

I am truly looking forward to reading Constance's article....especially about he Australian religious apostates.

The reason why is because of a "catholic" cult I have been following for many years which involves an Australian person who claims to be "Catholic."

I am not passing judgement on this gentleman.

Nevertheless, I will say that while this gentleman may be sincere, he is sincerely wrong!
 
http://www.newengelpublishing.com/categories/eBook/

following up on the names you mentioned, Constance, I found this site which deals with the homosexual scene in RC, and starts with St. Peter Damian's book on this from the 11th century (so much for the idea this is strictly the result of Vatican II and strictly recent).

maybe some of these ebooks The Rite of Sodomy Vols 1-5 would be of use, they are more expensive in hardback and $75 I think it was for all volumes in one book.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus#Antiquity Describes Damascus coming under rule and reduced conditions to where nothing is known about it during neo babylonian times,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus#Mamluk_period a total sack and the city walls destroyed and a pile of skulls outside, rebuilt later and became a Mamluk provincial capital until AD 1516.

these events might be fulfillments.
 
DC is filled with important people who have talked with other important people. I'm not impressed. Trust in and who one can depend on are more important in the long run.
 
Whether you are Catholic, protestant, Orthodox or rampant pagan, believe Malachi Martin and you'll believe anything!
 
Regarding M Martin, please give some analysis for your comment about his books. Your statement could be tossed out freely about anyone. Let's play your game. You are a contemptuous little snit with no knowledge and no accomplishments who likes demeaning people who have done something. As you are anonymous, only you know whether that is true or not though it probably is.
I have no reason to praise or demean Martin. I just so dislike creeps who contribute nothing except name calling.
 
Dear 6.35pm,

Isn't saying that I have no knowledge or accomplishments while admitting I am anonymous a little inconsistent? Insults like yours have a way of rebounding. Malachi Martin's dubious writings and credentials have been discussed in some detail on this blog in the last few years and I was presuming you were familiar with those discussions and knew how to look someone up on Wikipedia. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malachi_Martin#Controversies

and, for example, the thread beginning on this blog on September 25, 2010, in which the reliable Catholic contributor Susanna details Martin's untrustworthiness.

I have myself expelled spirits from persons in the name of Jesus Christ and I totally disagree with Martin that everytime someone is 'exorcised' a little of the exorcist dies - as he stated in his book Hostage to the Devil.

I was also once looking for details of any interaction between Constantine and Miltiades, who was Pope when Constantine won the Battle of Milvian Bridge and entered Rome in triumph in AD312. (Miltiades died a few months later and Constantine forged a church-State relation with his sucesssor Sylvester.) I found copious such detail in Malachi Martin's book Decline and Fall of the Roman Church. No references were given, however, and I failed to find those details in any of the early church writers who might have known. So I contacted a prominent academic early-church historian (I have myself published a paper in a journal of academic theology) and he said that no such detail was extant and, in words of exquisite courtesy, implied that Martin had made them up, just as he did in his novels.

That is why I don't trust a word that Martin wrote, and why I wrote what I did at 6.20pm - which I stand by.

 
Bill Koenig has documented how freak US weather coincides remarkably often with US diplomatic pressure on Israel. Koenig's watch.org website will be well worth reading on the giant Oklahoma tornado...


 
I agree there can be problems with Martin, however his remark about something of the exorcist dying, comes from a context of RC exorcism which is heavily dependent on recited prayers and may take days or months, meanwhile you get to listen to the thing spout all kinds of evil stuff at you. I think it is a matter of stress, the sense that something dies.

Some exorcist I forget if it was Martin (who admitted once he had never performed an exorcism merely participated in them) or someone else, that when you look evil in the face you are not the same.

Hostage to the devil described in too much detail the processes leading up to four categories of possession, in almost all cases the description is such you could if suggestible be reliving it while reading it, and perhaps this might make you vulnerable to some extent? I was afraid to read too much but skimmed a lot. In that book one thing stood out.

A priest had attracted retaliation, and for 2 or 3 weeks he suffered from all kinds of thoughts and feelings and finally when something started scratching at the window pane he started praying to Jesus for help.

THREE WEEKS OF THIS SKUBALA AND HE DIDN'T PRAY?!!! I pray at the first thought or two. It should never have gotten that far.

your casting out of spirits, was there a big fight, did you have to face down the thing in full possession of the victim and listen to it rant? how long did this take?

RC exorcism works, but it takes a lot of hard work and sheltering under a covering of church and ordination and so forth. How much direct leaning on Jesus is done I am not sure. Coptic for its heresies still works, better than islamic, since families with a member who is possessed will take the victim to a Coptic priest after the islamic exorcist has failed.
EO has some prayers to start out with before an exorcism is done but doesn't talk that much about it.
 
Great. An anonymous person stands by his word. You say you published an article and yet you won't give your name publicly here. Was your article published anonymously also? Ok. You don't like Malachi Martin's writings, but to base your attack on a 1700 year old piece of information and an anonymous early church historian? There must be a more serious reason that out of the blue you make a malicious post about Martin on a blog where no one really cares.
 
I think this anon's point is valid.
1. there are controversies about MM which are hashed over in detail by people who knew him and it doesn't look good for him, vs. his blindly loyal type followers on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/malachimartin as distinct from /malachimartinetc

These undermine his credibility.

2. 1700 year old stuff and an anonymous church historian - MM writes history and can't get this important bit right? something is wrong. And you can just google it or go to wikipedia or orthodoxwiki or any RC history regarding the time.

3. anon's personal experience seems to contradict some point MM made about exorcism, but it is not clear what KIND of experience anon has had with exorcism, how long a fight, etc. however I think MM tended to melodrama and the idea that something dies in the exorcist would rather fit an exhaustion scenario.

that said, MM seems to have had some access to information. Whether it was because he was sometimes some part of it himself and decided to profit, or repented a bit and decided to attack, I don't know. But given the OTHER sources out there incl. some Constance mentioned, I wouldn't question his scandal revelations so much.
 
"Great. An anonymous person stands by his word. You say you published an article and yet you won't give your name publicly here."

Nor will you!

"You don't like Malachi Martin's writings, but to base your attack on a 1700 year old piece of information and an anonymous early church historian?"

I gave multiple examples for Martin's unreliability, as observed by myself and others. Re the one you mentioned, I spent half a day in the library of a university checking out the discrepancy between Martin's Decline and Fall book and the early church's writers in and just after Constantine's time. I then emailed an academic who had written a book about Constantine to make sure I had missed nobody. Feel free to waste your own time replicating my paper chase. In that case I was probably the only victim of Martin's unreliability, and I learned plenty of interesting history as a result. But re the exorcism issue his words are reproducing a nonsensical tradition that deters committed Christians from doing something helpful. Nothing in the NT suggests that expelling demons from a person has any spiritual cost to a committed Christian who is filled with the Holy Spirit; why should it? This claim has a whiff of dualism about it.

"There must be a more serious reason that out of the blue you make a malicious post about Martin on a blog where no one really cares."

You seem to care. What is your interest?

 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/pope-francis-watch-pontiff-perform-1902188 This has got the media going, what do you make of it people?

from OZ
 
Laying on of hands is found in the NT although not in relation to the eviction of evil spirits. The latter might be a Catholic tradition however. So it is imposible to tell from scripture or tradition whether Pope Francis was attempting an eviction. You'd need to know what he was saying.

 
This comment has been removed by the author.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB67UiabfTc

The Revived Roman Empire Idea Debunked - an Exposition of Daniel 2:31-49
 
I have read that you don't want to touch someone possessed while trying to cast out the demon.

 
Pastor Ken Silva has been a guest from time to time on my internet radio program. This is an important article he has written on another particularly vile aspect of the current apostasies in vogue:

http://apprising.org/2012/08/10/the-sin-of-homosexuality-is-different/

Constance
 
Re Malachi Martin, I just don't know. I respect his writing. He had obvious character flaws demonstrated at least through the 1960s when he obviously according to the evidence of writers such as Blair Kaiser (former TIME MAGAZINE religious correspondent) in serial adulteries. HOWEVER, in tracking down those escapades and I don't claim to be in a position to throw the first stone at anybody, I found a book about one of his lovers, Wanda Jablonski, the oil reporting queen. They had a hot and heavy relationship, however, Malachi became increasingly angry and frustrated at her over her compromise over Islam with some of her Mideast oil magnate friends. She reported to her friends that he was becoming increasingly obsessed with Satanism and exorcisms. She left him in disgust over his new religious intensity. There is little reported about his sexual misconduct after the Wanda Jablonski incident. You can read about that in QUEEN OF THE OIL CLUB, THE INTREPID WANDA JABLONSKI AND THE POWER OF INFORMATION by Anna Rubino, with a foreword by Daniel Yergin. I personally suspect that he made his peace with God and cleaned up his act after that, at least that is what I pray happened.

God did use a few people in the Bible after notable sexual sins, most notably King David.

Constance
 
Has anybody given any serious question as to why the Theosophicals and the Evangelicals have the same apparent "holy city" of Wheaton, Illinois. Interestingly, Wheat College had a virtual shrine dedicated to C. S. Lewis and his friends. One of the best friends who had the greatest influence on C. S. Lewis was OWEN BARFIELD. OWEN BARFIELD was the greatest propagator in English of ANTHROPOSOPHY, the Theosophical variation on a theme started by Rudolf Steiner who was, by occult sources, the head of the European Illuminati. It was a prominent fellow of the C. S. Institute in Washington, D. C., Art Lindsley, who had the famed dinner with Barbara Marx Hubbard in Washington, D.C. that I reported about in HOLY WATERGATE, THE MISSING 18 1/2 HOUR TAPES. Direct ties here to Barbara Marx Hubbard, Paul N. Temple, and the rest of the "holy confusion" gang!

Constance
 
C.S. Lewis was part of the Inklings group, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inklings

"literary enthusiasts who praised the value of narrative in fiction, and encouraged the writing of fantasy. Although Christian values were notably present in several members' work, there were also non-Christian members of the discussion group.

The more regular members of the Inklings, many of them academics at the University, included J. R. R. "Tollers" Tolkien, C. S. "Jack" Lewis, Owen Barfield, Charles Williams, Tolkien's son Christopher, Lewis's elder brother Warren or "Warnie", Roger Lancelyn Green, Adam Fox, Hugo Dyson, R. A. "Humphrey" Havard, J. A. W. Bennett, Lord David Cecil, Nevill Coghill. More infrequent visitors included Percy Bates, Charles Leslie Wrenn, Colin Hardie, James Dundas-Grant, John David Arnett, Jon Fromke,[2] John Wain, R. B. McCallum, Gervase Mathew, and C. E. Stevens. Guests included author E. R. Eddison and South African poet Roy Campbell.
"Properly speaking," wrote Warren Lewis, "the Inklings was neither a club nor a literary society, though it partook of the nature of both. There were no rules, officers, agendas, or formal elections."[3] As was typical for university literary groups in their time and place, the Inklings were all male. (Dorothy L. Sayers, sometimes claimed as an Inkling, was a friend of Lewis and Williams, but never attended Inklings meetings.)
Readings and discussions of the members' unfinished works were the principal purposes of meetings. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, Lewis's Out of the Silent Planet, and Williams's All Hallows' Eve were among the novels first read to the Inklings. Tolkien's fictional Notion Club (see "Sauron Defeated") was based on the Inklings. Meetings were not all serious; the Inklings amused themselves by having competitions to see who could read the notoriously bad prose of Amanda McKittrick Ros for the longest without laughing.[4]"

Of the most famous of them, Lewis was the most Christian. Nonetheless, he retained enough pagan elements to be beloved by Christians and neopagans alike, ditto Tolkien, the latter much more so.

In some witch egroups, Tolkien has been credited with some finding their way into paganism.

Society for Creative Anachronism which cultivates arts of war and peace of ages past, has been a conveyorbelt both into regular and darkside occultism, and into Christianity. (the latter probably thanks to the medieval emphasis, which let some studying up on the characters they wanted to play coming into contact with monastic information and Christian doctrine.)
 
Fr. Lombardi: Pope Francis Did Not Perform Exorcis21m

Holy See Press Office Director Denies Reports that Pontiff Performed Rite on Young Man After Pentecost Mass

May 21, 2013

Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office, denied reports that Pope Francis performed an exorcism after the Pentecost Mass celebrated in St. Peter’s Square on Sunday.

As customary after public celebrations or general audiences, Pope Francis greeted and blessed the sick. A priest presented a wheelchair bound man to the Holy Father, upon which the Holy Father laid his hands on the man’s head. The young man seemed to be shaking and making strange noise which prompted speculations that an exorcism was performed.

Local Italian religious news channel TV2000 broadcasted the video along with commentary from several exorcists who said that the Holy Father was undoubtedly performing either an exorcism or a prayer of liberation from demonic possession.

“The Holy Father did not intend to perform any exorcism,” Fr. Lombardi told journalists this morning. “As he often does with sick and suffering people who are presented to him, he simply intended to pray for the suffering person.”

http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/fr-lombardi-pope-francis-did-not-perform-exorcism




 
CS Lewis understands some deep thoughts, as those who convert to Christianity often reference.

Peculiarly, he never addresses Mary and the concept of motherhood as part of the Christian experience. He must have understood the significance of the Virgin Mary becoming a mother - a process of imagination and sacrifice that is a shadow and predecessor of her son Jesus' life and death. Mary was the person, woman, who unlike Eve did not elevate herself to a goddess and in turn bore the child of God.

In his book, "Mere Christianity", Lewis writes that he will leave out controversial topics, but instead he leaves out an essential part of Christianity. Troublingly, the motivation might have been money, since he was able to gain a vast audience of modern evangelicals who do not understand motherhood.

There are a couple other instances where CS Lewis gets an idea "exactly wrong."

One example is his belief in evolution, and his statements that it would not be surprising to imagine man "evolving" into the next being, a god. There are some new age ideas in some of Lewis' writings.

Now, even at this blog I have learned things in the past six years, and I believe certain Christians, Muslims, and Jews are learning amazing things today that no-one has understood prior. CS Lewis might have simply been confused on some issues, as he was understanding on others.
 
In what way do evangelicals not understand motherhood? and what do you mean "the Virgin Mary becoming a mother - a process of imagination and sacrifice" sounds rather New Agey itself.

C. S. Lewis never denied the Virgin Birth did he? If he affirmed that then he left nothing out. Us becoming gods is an uncomfortable idea. Though St. Peter speaks of our participating in the divine nature or something like that, this whole becoming more godly or godlike is regeneration not become gods by essence or nature.

Lewis seems to have had a negative view of women in general which probably played a role here. But Mary said at Cana regarding her Son, "do whatever He says," and I love the way Orthodox icons have her pointing to Jesus, not herself.
 
Mere Christianity began as a series of radio lectures during the war. The idea that CS Lewis left Mary out of it in order to make money is ludicrous. Mary is a huge Reformation issue; the 39 Articles of the Church of England in which Lewis worshipped refer to Rome's 'idolatrous worship of Mary', and Lewis chose not to mention his own church's stance which is a powerful indication that he was sincere when he said that he simply wanted to concentrate on the things which united Christians. (We now know that his friendship with Tolkien weakened to mere mutual respect because of the Reformation, and I am sure Lewis did not wish to revisit that.) Moreover he consistently gave away more than half of his academic salary to charity.

Motherhood as part of the Christian experience? I guess that makes me a second class Christian as I am a man. If, moreover, you are a Catholic, then your own church accepts evolution and knows how to reconcile it with scripture.
 
Anonymous 1:38

Re:Lewis chose not to mention his own church's stance ( on the Blessed Virgin Mary ) which is a powerful indication that he was sincere when he said that he simply wanted to concentrate on the things which united Christians.

This is correct. I have studied enough of the writings of C.S.Lewis to know that he said so himself.
 
P.S.

Rare CS Lewis Letters Discussing Religion And Evolution Donated To Belfast University

Posted: 20/08/2012

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/08/20/rare-cs-lewis-letters-donated-belfast-university_n_1810646.html
_________________________________

I am just learning about these letters.
 
I am very interested to read what you intend to write on the New Age Nuns Constance, particularly those here in Australia. It seems as though a serious infiltration is going on and not just within the Catholic church but in every Christian denomination.

Was it here that I'd read that Solana's Mother was keen on the Bagwhan Shri Rajneesh and his teachings? Either way, I've witnessed this lot first hand when they decided to move into my hometown back in the early eighties. The Bagwhan sent his special lady Sheila here to get the ball rolling. They didn't get to stay too long, thank God. It was quite a thing at the time, we'd never come across people like them or what they were promoting. In the end 60 minutes showed up to our sleepy town where the townsfolk met in the local hall to voice their views on the dreadful influence these people would have on family life etc etc. Not long after them leaving town all hell broke loose for Sheila and the hierarchy back in the US and things folded. Decent people really need to band together when blatant evil comes to town!

I really enjoy your write ups Constance.


from OZ
 
Pope Francis Says Atheists Who Do Good Are Redeemed, Not Just Catholics

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html

Roman Catholicism in all it's glory! This blog will expose bad doctrine anywhere it's found except Roman Catholicism which is wrought with heresy. We will all give an account.
 
Here we go...

Gay Fla. teen's family wants lesser charges in sex case

Hunt played on the basketball team with her younger girlfriend and shared the same circle of friends, said Hunt's mother, Kelley Hunt Smith. The two had a consenting relationship that began soon after Kaitlyn Hunt turned 18, and Hunt Smith said she assumed the younger girl's parents knew that.

Sorry, but, according to LAW, a 14 year old cannot have a "consenting relationship" (sexual).

But Hunt was kicked off the basketball team near the end of last year after the coach learned of the relationship because players were not allowed to date each other, her parents said...

I'd think the coach would 'look the other way', unless someone complained - but, I concede this may be the true account. But, why was Hunt kicked off the team and not the minor; or, if the minor was also kicked off the team, why doesn't this article specify?

...Then, in February, she was charged with lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 to 16. The day before she was arrested, police and the younger girl's parents secretly recorded a phone conversation in which the two girls discussed kissing in the school bathroom, said Hunt's father, Steve Hunt.

Reading between the lines here, it seems the parents of the younger girl had been aware of this relationship, were NOT approving, and may well have tried to stop the older girl's advances previously (getting her kicked off the b-ball team?). Thus, they decided to pursue this through criminal means.

Or, the fact that Hunt was kicked off the b-ball team was the means by which the parents of the younger girl found out about their daughter's relationship.

In any case, no matter the story, this will likely be a test case of sorts. Will there be a formal push to lower the age of consent?
 
Anon 9:59,

For the record, I have many problems with the RCC, and I do speak to those here on occasion.

Assuming the Huff piece did not take Pope Francis out of context, I'm quite alarmed!

He [Pope Francis] told the story of a Catholic who asked a priest if even atheists had been redeemed by Jesus.

"Even them, everyone," the pope answered, according to Vatican Radio. "We all have the duty to do good," he said.



Yes, Christ died for all; however, only those who accept Christ's sacrifice are the redeemed. Yes, we can all "do good", but doing good is not proof that any one person is "redeemed".
 
I am able to do good works because I am saved (the Holy Spirit in me-there by Faith Alone in the Lord Jesus' Blood Atonement Alone-is the Power for Good-the Eternal kind). I do not do good works in order to be saved (that is the human will striving for it's own temporal glory---and very "new age"---but not new-I might add)
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Notice it says H I S workmanship--not our own. Religion (the religious types) believes it can redeem itself by (working--good deeds) reaching--up--to touch God--But--a Relationship by Faith in Christ Jesus believes H e reached---down---to touch and redeem (Gift) us sinners by His Grace and Mercy---no "good works" of ours involved..There is none righteous--no not one . Romans 3:10-12 spells this out-we cannot in any way save ourselves-Faith--that beautiful freewill understanding--not the force of works--brings (the Gift) His Hand of Mercy d o w n into our deepest need-that the proud refuse to acknowledge so "work" instead to the loss (what a terrible shame) of their own souls...............

 
Craig,


"Even them, everyone," the pope answered, according to Vatican Radio. "We all have the duty to do good," he said.


Yes, Christ died for all; however, only those who accept Christ's sacrifice are the redeemed. Yes, we can all "do good", but doing good is not proof that any one person is "redeemed".
______________________________


Since it is not for us to " know where the wind blows " (John 3:8), or to limit the activity of the Holy Spirit - "the Lord and Giver of Life" -it follows that no one can be certain that God in His infinite Mercy has not provided for those who do not know Him but who nevertheless do the best they can with the little knowledge they have - including atheists - are given a special opportunity to accept Christ's sacrifice "in articulo mortis." (at the moment of death.)

When all is said and done, you are correct in this regard.....all will have to accept Christ and His
Sacrifice in order to enter Heaven.


 
P.S. In Scripture, the hymn sung by the angels when Christ was born was Glory to God in the highest and and on earth peace to people of good will. The angels did not say "on earth peace to the Jews alone." Their hymn included non-Jews as well!

As Steve Anderson writes in the UK's INDEPENDENT:

Pope Francis has said that atheists should be seen as good people as long as they do good, in a move to urge people of all religions - or no religion at all - to get along.

The Catholic leader, who heads the 1.2 billion-strong Church, made his comments in the homily of his morning Mass in his residence, a daily event where he speaks without prepared comments.

He told the story of a Catholic who asked a priest if even atheists could be redeemed by Jesus.

"Even them, everyone," the pope answered, according to Vatican Radio. "We all have the duty to do good," he said.

"Just do good and we'll find a meeting point," the pope said in a hypothetical conversation in which someone told a priest: "But I don't believe. I'm an atheist."

Pope Francis's comments are in marked contrast to his predecessor Benedict, who is reported to have left some non-Catholics feeling
that he saw them as second-class believers.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-being-an-atheist-is-alright-as-long-as-you-do-good-8629390.html
______________________________

Apparently, Pope Francis doesn't want any non-Catholics to feel like "second class believers" - including non-Catholic Christians!
 
Susanna,

With all due respect, the one does not follow the other. Let me explain:

Was King David "good" until he sinned and then no longer "good"? At want point does a person go from 'bad' to "good" and vice versa?

According to strict Christian orthodoxy, NO ONE IS GOOD but God. Christ's sacrifice only makes those who've accepted His sacrifice "good" because of their acceptance of Christ's Atoning work on the Cross. This is despite our continued shortcomings.

Yes, any one non-Christian can do a "good" thing; but, this does not make said person "redeemed". Even a Christian can do "good" to be recognized by men instead of truly doing good under the submission of the Holy Spirit.

Moreover, a person can live a life of crime, yet accept Christ on their deathbed and hence be saved. Would we characterize their life as "good"? Certainly not. However, according to the Christian faith, this person is now "good" in the eyes of God only because they are now redeemed.

Pope Francis has blurred all these categories with his statement:

He [Pope Francis] told the story of a Catholic who asked a priest if even atheists had been redeemed by Jesus.

"Even them, everyone," the pope answered, according to Vatican Radio. "We all have the duty to do good," he said.


He's conflated "redeemed" with "good", and these two do not necessarily go hand in hand, as illustrated above. Only the truly redeemed can do good - and this only in submission to the Holy Spirit.
 
Jesus' death and Resurrection did two things primarily. 1. it laid the groundwork for the renewal eventually of all creation, and guaranteed the resurrection of all and giving immortal indestructible physical bodies to all, good and bad. That is aside from whether they will be spending eternity in those bodies happy or miserable.

2. it provided forgiveness and a happy eternity both in the interim while dead and physically in the resurrection of the dead, for those who repent and accept Jesus as Lord and therefore Savior.

That said, gradations in both categories clearly exist. Jesus spoke of some receiving "the greater damnation" which implies there is a lesser damnation, and that Tyre and Sidon would have it worse in The Judgement than Sodom and Gomorrha, because they had had opportunities and did not repent, that Sodom and Gomorrha did NOT have and would have repented had they had those opportunities.

If some atheist is unbeknownst to him or her following some guidance from God in doing good, that person may then receive more light and may be on track to salvation in the protestant sense of the word, which is actually a process, both a clear point of decision but a growth after that. Some say this confuses sanctification with salvation, but not really, because you are getting saved from less sanctification into more, and saved from backsliding when you do backslide and so forth.

St. Paul speaks of crowns given to believers. These seem to be in multiple categories.


 
Pastor DeJacomo looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger!

 
Religion or Relationship? (my good works become my duty or my devotion results my changed life?)
The Have-to or The Want-to? matter of the will. driven or surrendered?
Forced or Freewill? (only one excepts His Mercy)
Saved or Unsaved?
Believe-in-God or BELIEVE GOD?



We are all born once-Yes-but are all born again???????
No.
Jesus -- get that -- Jesus said: except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. John 3:3
Atheism is a religion too-a belief. (we all believe in something...)
Even the devil believes in God but does not believe God. the Bible says he trembles in fear of God but does not repent. Repentance and Faith go together >>> repentance toward God (sorrow over sin-actually agrees with what God calls sin)--knows the shame of the sinful s e l f) + faith in Jesus' Blood Sacrifice in your personal behalf--it is my s i n debt He paid.
so......born once-die twice (2nd is eternal death-separation forever from God). OR born twice-die once (physical death only) Eternal Life through Jesus Christ The Lord!)
Concluding == The Gospel is f r e e to all. Jesus said: I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but (except) by Me. John 14:6. The Exclusive Lord wants to Include all...for God so loved the world.....from John 3:16. (but not all want Him.....) I can only hope and pray that others will take God at His Word and accept His Offer through The Cross of His Son, before Eternity comes to their hearts doorstep. (do y o u know Him or only about Him?)
Jesus is waiting...do not put this off--anyone--everyone--please...
 
Craig,

There are two types of "good" that need to be considered.

Natural goodness and supernatural goodness.

Atheists, like pagans, can be "good" according to the natural law which is also God's law.

In fact, the Ten Commandments are a codification of the Natural Law.

The Ten Commandments are not merely a list of rules that a person must obey in order to be a good Jew or Christian. They are the laws that a person must obey in order to qualify as a human being - redeemed or not.

Moreover, this natural goodness derives not from man by himself. It derives from man being made "in the image and likeness of God" who is perfect Goodness Himself.

ALL goodness - is but a participation in God's goodness......which supports your statement NO ONE IS GOOD BUT GOD<.

The Scriptures support this in Genesis where God pronounced all of creation "GOOD." He pronounced man "Very Good."

And behold, it was very good; it had been said of everything else, at the close of each day's work, excepting the second, that it was good; but here the expression is stronger upon the creation of man, the chief and principal work of God, that it was "very good"; he being made upright and holy, bearing the image of his Creator upon him, and in such circumstances as to be happy and comfortable himself, and to glorify God: the phrase may be expressive not only of the goodness of everything God had made, as it was in itself, and in its use; but of his complacency, and delight therein, every thing being made for himself and for, his pleasure, Revelation 4:11.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-31.htm
_________________________________

Evil, on the other hand, is not "something" in its own right. It is a parasite upon the good. Good can exist without evil ( and did before the Fall)but evil cannot exist without good.

Evil by itself is NOTHING.....a NEGATION... Theologically, it is defined as "the privation of a good which ought to be present."

Therefore, in terms of your question "At want point does a person go from 'bad' to "good" and vice versa?" we must be careful not to get into the habit of thinking that person goes from "bad" to "good" and vice versa in terms of suddenly being totally "bad" or totally "good."

On this side of eternity, the ability - with the help of God's grace - to repent of even the most horrendous sins is itself a vestige of goodness.......perhaps a very faint vestige of goodness, but goodness nevertheless......a goodness that prevents a person from being irredeemable on this side of eternity.

And here it must be pointed out that because evil cannot exist except as a parasite upon the good, evil can never be as evil as it wants to be.

I am not in disagreement with you on the absolute need for the redemption won by Christ.

What I am saying is that even though we are fallen, we can still choose to be naturally good in terms of obeying the natural law, but we cannot be supernaturally good ( i.e. fit for heaven ) apart from the redemption supernaturally wrought for us by Christ ( who is truly God and truly man ) Who restored sanctifying grace to our souls through His Sacrifice.

Ergo, the Pope, who is a theologian in his own right has not conflated "redeemed" with "good" in the sense that you have described.

As a Catholic theologian, Pope Francis would certainly know the difference between natural goodness and the supernatural goodness of Christ and the Redemption.
 
Craig,

I will grant you that "Redeemed" and "good" do not necessarily go hand in hand.

One of the most famous lines of T.S. Eliot's MURDER IN THE CATHEDRAL read:

The last temptation is the greatest treason

To do the right thing for the right reason.


And we must not forget that Judas betrayed Our Lord with a kiss.
 
I meant to say

To do the right thing for the WRONG reason

Sorry
 
Murder in the Cathedral is a great play. A friend who was (Anglican) chaplain at an exclusive boarding school once directed his pupils in it and it was superb; on the strength of that I booked for a semiprofessional cast performing it in Canterbury Cathedral itself, but it wasn't as good as my friend's production!

Seven years and the summer is over...

Physicist

 
Just thought you guys might be interested in seeing this.

Texas Lawmakers to Eliminate Controversial 'Anti-American' Curriculum

Texas lawmakers announced Monday that CSCOPE, a controversial online curriculum system used in 78 percent of school districts in the state, will be removed from the state’s education system. The curriculum program has been lambasted by parents, faculty, and conservative groups for “anti-American” content.

Texas state Senator Dan Patrick (R-Houston) said, in both a press conference and a press release, “I’m very pleased to announce this morning that the era of CSCOPE lesson plans has come to an end.”

During the press conference, Dr. Kyle Wargo, a board member of the Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative (TESCCC), which is CSCOPE’s governing board, asserted, “CSCOPE is no longer doing lessons, period. One size does not fit all. Those lessons, every lesson, needs to be developed on a local level.”

Patrick thanked all parents who got involved in their children’s education and the state’s legislators who worked together to remove the controversial program from the state’s education system.

CSCOPE is a comprehensive, grades K-12 curriculum system whereby lesson plans, which are written by CSCOPE staff, and both current and former teachers, are delivered online to teachers who then can organize their teaching points as required by their state.

Texas CSCOPE Review, an independent watchdog group, uncovered an out-of-date, optional world history CSCOPE lesson plan on the topic of terrorism, which reportedly gave the Boston Tea Party as an example of “an act of terrorism.”

In the lesson plan, the teacher’s instructions are provided as follows:


Read the following to the students as a whole as if it just happened within the hour in a location near by.

News report: A local militia, believed to be a terrorist organization, attacked the property of private citizens today at the port. Although no one was injured in the attack, a large quantity of merchandise, considered to be valuable to its owners and loathsome to the perpetrators, was destroyed. The terrorists, dressed as natives and apparently intoxicated, were able to escape into the night with the help of local citizens who harbor these fugitives and conceal their identities from the authorities. It is believed that the terrorist attack was a response to the policies enacted by the occupying country’s government.

The watchdog group also cited that a CSCOPE lesson plan for sixth graders asked students to design a flag for a new socialist nation. The lesson plan reads as follows:


Notice socialist/communist nations use symbolism on their flags representing various aspects of their economic system. Imagine a new socialist nation is creating a flag and you have been put in charge of creating a flag. Use symbolism to represent aspects of socialism/communism on your flag. What kind of symbolism/colors would you use?


cont...
 
cont...

According to the Star-Telegram, when members of the state Senate Education Committee interrogated the creators of CSCOPE last January, a string of witnesses criticized the program for promoting values they said are “anti-Christian at best and openly socialist at worst.”

Witnesses also complained that CSCOPE makes it difficult for nonteachers to review the program.

Wade Lebay, however, director of state CSCOPE at the Region 13 Education Service Center in Austin, defended the online system. Lebay said CSCOPE offers approximately 1,600 model lessons that districts can access for a fee of only $7 per student.

“It’s built by teachers, designed by teachers and that’s what’s powerful about CSCOPE,” he said.

Texas CSCOPE Review reported in March that the State Board of Education had not evaluated the CSCOPE material, and that it would take years for all K-12 lessons to be evaluated. The watchdog group found fault with social studies lessons in which students are required to explain how Islam influences law and government in the Muslim world.

In addition, the watchdog group cited two Texas World History standards, called TEKS, in which it claims the CSCOPE lesson plan:


…twists the objectives and adds incorrect religious information. By introducing the idea that Allah and the God of the Bible are the same, then verses from the Qua’ran teaching that Allah is the almighty God further indoctrinates your child.

The red type below shows the CSCOPE objective:


WH.1 History. The student understands traditional historical points of reference in world history. The student is expected to:

WH.1B Identify major causes and describe the major effects of the following events from 500 BC to AD 600: the development of the classical civilizations of Greece, Rome, Persia, India (Maurya and Gupta), China (Zhou, Qin, and Han), and the development of major world religions.

Allah – monotheistic deity; also recognized as the God of Abraham (Yahweh)

WH.23 Culture. The student understands the history and relevance of major religious and philosophical traditions. The student is expected to:

WH.23A Describe the historical origins, central ideas, and spread of major religious and philosophical traditions, including Buddhism, Christianity,Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, and the development of monotheism.

Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) – one supreme God; also referenced as Yahweh or Allah

According to the Houston Chronicle, on Friday the CSCOPE governing board is expected to unanimously vote to end the lesson plan component of the program. State Sen. Patrick said that, in the future, he would like to see school districts partner on curriculum development.


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/22/Texas-Lawmakers-Announce-Plan-To-Eliminate-Controversial-CSCOPE-Curriculum-Program-From-Schools
 
Physicist 2:35

How fortunate you were to have had the opportunity to see a skillful performance of MURDER IN THE CATHEDRAL!
 
Susanna,

As a Texas resident, I'm quite happy that he CSCOPE curriculum is being replaced.

 
Christine 1:15

You are right. There are degrees of good and evil and degrees of damnation.

St. Therese de Lisieux once said "the way to heaven is itself heaven."

Of course, the corollary to that is "The way to hell is hell."

C. S. Lewis was paraphrasing St. Therese de Lisieux when he suggested that Heaven and Hell were "retroactive."


Nothing vs. Something: The Meaning Heaven (and Hell) Give to Life

In his novel The Great Divorce, C.S. Lewis conjectured that Heaven and Hell retroactively imbue a person’s life with meaning. If a person goes to Heaven, even the worst and most trying times in life are transformed into stepping-stones toward eternal happiness.

If a person goes to Hell, even their most blissful moments are tainted, as they were part of a road that ultimately led to perdition......read more...



http://www.thebcobserver.com/2010/09/21/nothing-vs-something-the-meaning-heaven-and-hell-give-to-life/
____________________________





 
Craig,

I am thrilled for you!

Hopefully, once conservative groups are given their tax-exempt status that they were deprived of by a corrupt IRS, CSCOPE will be "history" in other places as well.
 
Craig,

Sorry. I meant to sign the previous message.

I zigged when I should have zagged. LOL


 
Susanna, re: your 2:55 post,

I like the distinction between natural good and supernatural good (it saves me from putting quotes around “good”). So, it follows that only the redeemed can do supernatural good (and, of the flesh also do natural good), while the unredeemed (all non-Christians) can only do natural good.

However, I disagree that Mosaic Law = Natural Law, as, but one example: can the unredeemed really observe the Sabbath? (Or, even do Christians observe the Sabbath as per Mosaic Law? – I don’t wish to go down a rabbit trail on this…) Can the unredeemed actually be able to not take the Lord’s name in vain if they don’t see Him as Lord? But, generally, yes, I see this as a good principle.

Moreover, this natural goodness derives not from man by himself. It derives from man being made "in the image and likeness of God" who is perfect Goodness Himself.

I disagree with this, as the Fall necessarily made it impossible for man to be “good”. Man is naturally evil, not naturally good, as a result of the Fall. It’s our sin nature.

In any case, I’ll use the distinction between natural good and supernatural good. With this in mind, it would seem to me that all the references to “good” in the pope’s statement are to natural good rather than supernatural good.

But, we’ve not defined “redeemed”. I don’t think there is a distinction. One is either redeemed or one is not.

With all the foregoing in mind, Pope Francis’ statement is still problematic:

Pope Francis has said that atheists should be seen as [natural] good people as long as they do [natural] good, in a move to urge people of all religions - or no religion at all - to get along.

The Catholic leader, who heads the 1.2 billion-strong Church, made his comments in the homily of his morning Mass in his residence, a daily event where he speaks without prepared comments.

He told the story of a Catholic who asked a priest if even atheists could be redeemed by Jesus.

"Even them, everyone," the pope answered, according to Vatican Radio. "We all have the duty to do [natural] good," he said.

"Just do [natural] good and we'll find a meeting point," the pope said in a hypothetical conversation in which someone told a priest: "But I don't believe. I'm an atheist."

Pope Francis's comments are in marked contrast to his predecessor Benedict, who is reported to have left some non-Catholics feeling that he saw them as second-class believers.


If/since doing natural good does not equate with being redeemed, then why did Pope Francis equate these concepts? If the question is if atheists can be redeemed by Jesus generally, then, yes, of course, this is true. However, this is not how the above is phrased. Deducing this statement down to simple terms, we have:

Atheists can be redeemed by Jesus if they do natural good.
Or:

Doing natural good could make an atheist redeemed by Jesus.

This is categorically false according to orthodox Christianity.

Once an atheist is redeemed he then has the capacity to do supernatural good – but not before his redemption by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.
 
Of course nonbelievers can do good. But it doesn't please God - he doesn't want your works, he wants YOU. Then he can work through you. Then (and only then) are you saved from the lake of fire as your final fate. This theme in the Bible pre-dates Jesus, for "Abraham believed, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Genesis 15:6).
 
Susanna,

I don't like the way I phrased part of my comment at 3:43. I agree with you theologically on evil. Post-Fall we are predisposed to evil with our sin nature, but yet we do have a God-given conscience. However, I'd say most of the natural good is done with impure motives. We may do it to look good in others' eyes, do it as a way to please Deity (whoever S/He/them may be in the individual's eyes), etc.

Light exposes darkness; however, darkness cannot extinguish light.
 
Craig,

The Fall made it impossible for man to be supernaturally good. It took the Redemption to make it possible once more for man to be supernaturally good.

Man has always been capable of being naturally good.

On many things we are going to have to agree to disagree, but for what it is worth, here is the Catholic definition of Redemption from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

REDEMPTION

The restoration of man from the bondage of sin to the liberty of the children of God through the satisfactions and merits of Christ.

The word redemptio is the Latin Vulgate rendering of Hebrew kopher and Greek lytron which, in the Old Testament means generally a ransom-price. In the New Testament, it is the classic term designating the "great price" (1 Corinthians 6:20) which the Redeemer paid for our liberation. Redemption presupposes the original elevation of man to a supernatural state and his downfall from it through sin; and inasmuch as sin calls down the wrath of God and produces man's servitude under evil and Satan, Redemption has reference to both God and man. On God's part, it is the acceptation of satisfactory amends whereby the Divine honour is repaired and the Divine wrath appeased. On man's part, it is both a deliverance from the slavery of sin and a restoration to the former Divine adoption, and this includes the whole process of supernatural life from the first reconciliation to the final salvation. That double result, namely God's satisfaction and man's restoration, is brought about by Christ's vicarious office working through satisfactory and meritorious actions performed in our behalf....

Universality of redemption

Whether the effects of Redemption reached out to the angelic world or to the earthly paradise is a disputed point among theologians. When the question is limited to fallen man it has a clear answer in such passages as I John, ii, 2; 1 Timothy 2:4 and 4:10; 2 Corinthians 5:16, etc.; all bearing out the Redeemer's intention to include in His saving work the universality of men without exception. Some apparently restrictive texts like Matthew 20:28 and 26:28; Rom., v, 15; Hebrews 9:28, where the words "many" (Multi), "more" (plures), are used in reference to the extent of Redemption, should be interpreted in the sense of the Greek phrase no pollon, which means the generality of men, or by way of comparison, not between a portion of mankind included in, and another left out of, Redemption, but between Adam and Christ. In the determination of the many problems that arose from time to time in this difficult matter, the Church was guided by the principle laid down in the Synod of Quierzy [Denzinger-Bannwart n. 319 (282)] and the Council of Trent [Sess. VI, c. iii, Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 795 (677)] wherein a sharp line is drawn between the power of Redemption and its actual application in particular cases. The universal power has been maintained against the Predestinarians and Calvinists who limited Redemption to the predestinated (cf. the councils named above), and against the Jansenists who restricted it to the faithful or those who actually come to faith [prop. 4 and 5, condemned by Alexander VIII, in Denzinger-Bannwart, 1294-5 (1161-2)] and the latter's contention that it is a Semi-Pelagian error to say that Christ died for all men has been declared heretical [Denzinger-Bannwart, n.1096 (970)].

The opinion of Vasquez and a few theologians, who placed children dying without baptism outside the pale of Redemption, is commonly rejected in Catholic schools. In such cases no tangible effects of Redemption can be shown, but this is no reason for pronouncing them outside the redeeming virtue of Christ. They are not excluded by any Biblical text.



cont....


 
cont...

Vasquez appeals to 1 Timothy 2:3-6, to the effect that those children, not having any means or even possibility to come to the knowledge of the truth, do not seem to be included in the saving will of God. If applied to infants at all, the text would exclude likewise those who, as a matter of fact, receive baptism. It is not likely that Redemption would seek adults laden with personal sins and omit infants labouring under original sin only. Far better say with St. Augustine: "Numquid parvuli homines non sunt, ut non pertineat ad eos quod dictum est: vult omnes salvos fieri?" (Contra Julianum, IV, xiii). With regard to the de facto application of Redemption in particular cases, it is subject to many conditions, the principal being human liberty and the general laws which govern the world both natural and supernatural. The Universalists' contention that all should finally be saved lest Redemption be a failure is not only unsupported by, but also opposed to, the New Dispensation which far from suppressing the general laws of the natural order, places in the way of salvation many indispensable conditions or laws of a freely established supernatural order. Neither should we be moved by the reproaches of failure often flung at Redemption on the plea that, after nineteen centuries of Christianity, a comparatively small portion of mankind has heard the voice of the Good Shepherd (John 10:16) and a still smaller fraction has entered the true fold. It was not within God's plan to illumine the world with the light of the Incarnate Word at once, since he waited thousands of years to send the Desired of the Nations. The laws of progress which obtain everywhere else govern also the Kingdom of God. We have no criterion whereby we can tell with certainty the success or failure of Redemption, and the mysterious influence of the Redeemer may reach farther than we think in the present as it certainly has a retroactive effect upon the past. There can be no other meaning to the very comprehensive terms of Revelation. The graces accorded by God to the countless generations preceding the Christian era, whether Jews or Pagans, were, by anticipation, the graces of Redemption. There is little sense in the trite dilemma that Redemption could benefit neither those who were already saved nor those who were forever lost, for the just of the Old Law owed their salvation to the anticipated merits of the coming Messias and the damned lost their souls because they spurned the graces of illumination and good will which God granted them in prevision of the saving works of the Redeemer.
.....


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12677d.htm


Re: If/since doing natural good does not equate with being redeemed, then why did Pope Francis equate these concepts?

To say that the Pope was "equating" doing natural good with being redeemed involves assuming something that one has no right to assume since he did not explicitly say any such thing.

Merely using the terms "doing natural good" and "redeemed" in the same sentence does not necessarily mean that he is equating the two.

The Pope said:

"Just do [natural] good and we'll find a meeting point," the pope said

As in the case of ancient pagans the doing of such natural good is but a "preparation for the gospels."

It is not Redemption, but it is a preparation for Redemption......especially if Redemption is retroactive!!!!! In which case it can elevate natural good to supernatural good.

We must never forget that Jesus Christ is truly God as well as truly man and that the Risen Lord is related to time and space differently than He was when He walked on earth among us.
 
Craig,

RE:If the question is if atheists can be redeemed by Jesus generally, then, yes, of course, this is true. However, this is not how the above is phrased. Deducing this statement down to simple terms, we have:

Atheists can be redeemed by Jesus if they do natural good.
Or:

Doing natural good could make an atheist redeemed by Jesus.


Atheists are redeemed by Jesus already. The Redemption is there for the taking. The question is whether or not they freely accept it since God forces Himself on no one against their will.

If atheists are redeemed, it is not because of any natural good that they do - although doing natural good can serve as a preparation for accepting the Gospels.

The natural law is founded on the Golden Rule "Do as you would be done by."

The supernatural Law - a.k.a. The Great Commandment is founded on the Law of Love. ( Agape ) to love God above all things and to love one's neighbor as one's self out of love for God.

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”


Matthew 22:36-40


The Ten Commandments embody the entire natural law.

The Ten Commandments or Decalogue (10 words) was given by God on Mt. Horeb (also known as Mt. Sinai) to Moses around 1280 BC. They are the core of the moral teachings of Israel and have come down to Christianity as part of Divine Revelation. The Church in commenting on the Commandments sees in them the totality of the negative and positive moral law, the things we should not do, as well as the things we should do. This is to say, they embody the entire natural law, what reason can discover of morality from the nature of the world and man. However, as St. Thomas Aquinas noted, not every society, much less every man, discovers the entire natural law, so God has revealed it in the Commandments so it could be known with certainty by all men, of every society, and every age. ......

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/ten_commandments.htm



Now if the Ten Commandsments embodies the entire Natural Law, we can see how the doing of natural good by the pagans of old -or even of atheists in our own time - can serve as a "preparation for the Gospels."
 
Atheists are redeemed by Jesus already. The Redemption is there for the taking. The question is whether or not they freely accept it since God forces Himself on no one against their will.

If atheists are redeemed, it is not because of any natural good that they do - although doing natural good can serve as a preparation for accepting the Gospels.


I nearly typed something to this effect just a bit ago as a possible explanation for Pope Francis' statement (not that I agree with it). But, I find the overlapping terminology unsatisfactory, as it leads to potential confusion.

To state that Christ's Atoning work on the Cross provides for the potential for redemption seems much better, with the caveat that redemption only comes at the point the individual has accepted Christ as Lord and Savior. To rephrase: Christ's death on the Cross provided the means by which any person can be redeemed, however, it's the acceptance of Christ's salvific work which effects redemption in the individual. All are potentially redeemed, but only those who accept Christ's redeeming sacrifice on the Cross are actually redeemed.

I find some of the RCC theological statements very precise, while others are far too ambiguous. This is a definite case in which the ambiguity leads to confusion.


 
This is from Catholic Online.

I apologize if I have not been able to make things clearer. Even if you don't agree, I want to make sure you understand what it is that you are disagreeing with :-)

The following is from Catholic Online:

Pope Francis has good news for atheists. Jesus died and was raised for them as well. His redemptive embrace was for all, not just a chosen few.The choice to accept its reach is our own. The Holy Father was not teaching anything new. In fact, this hope that all who do not yet know God are not only capable of doing good - but will progress toward that knowledge of God by doing good - is ancient. The Church wants all men and women to be saved.....

.....The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes) contains an important explanation of the phenomena referred to as 'Atheism' (See, GS #17-22). It is a very large term and we have to first examine what is meant when it is embraced by an individual to best understand the effect of the claim.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that "Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion but the imputability of the offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances" (CCC#2125).

The Holy Father was not teaching anything new. In fact, this hope that all who do not yet know God are not only capable of doing good - but will progress toward that knowledge of God by doing good - is ancient. On Good Friday we all pray:

Let us pray also for those who do not believe in Christ,that, enlightened by the Holy Spirit,they, too, may enter on the way of salvation. Almighty ever-living God,grant to those who do not confess Christ that, by walking before you with a sincere heart, they may find the truth and that we ourselves, being constant in mutual love and striving to understand more fully the mystery of your life, may be made more perfect witnesses to your love in the world. Through Christ our Lord.

We are judged by a just God who will welcome us based on what we have done with what we knew. Those who do not know God will be judged on the good they have done and the values lived by, to paraphrase a quote oft attributed to the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

However, the most loving thing we can do for all men and women is recognize that they too hunger for the God who created them and then help them to find Him as He is fully and completely revealed in his Son Jesus Christ and the Church. That includes recognizing the good that they do and joining with them in the work. ...
..read entire article...

http://www.catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=51077
 
Susanna,

As in the case of ancient pagans the doing of such natural good is but a "preparation for the gospels."

It is not Redemption, but it is a preparation for Redemption......especially if Redemption is retroactive!!!!! In which case it can elevate natural good to supernatural good.

We must never forget that Jesus Christ is truly God as well as truly man and that the Risen Lord is related to time and space differently than He was when He walked on earth among us.


I’ll take these statements one at a time:

As in the case of ancient pagans the doing of such natural good is but a "preparation for the gospels."

I see more the supernatural good of others can lead to natural good of the pagan. As the pagan continues to see the supernatural good and becomes convicted by the Holy Spirit’s work, then said pagan can be led to redemption. However, the pagan just performing natural good, is not necessarily a preparation for the Gospel message if said pagan is in a works-based religion, trying to please his/her own deity/deities.

It is not Redemption, but it is a preparation for Redemption......especially if Redemption is retroactive!!!!! In which case it can elevate natural good to supernatural good.

I’ve already addressed the first part. I agree that Christ’s redeeming work on the Cross is retroactive to those in OT times, but I don’t see how this can be applied to an individual post-Cross such that his natural good works before his acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior can be elevated to supernatural works post-conversion. [see below]

We must never forget that Jesus Christ is truly God as well as truly man and that the Risen Lord is related to time and space differently than He was when He walked on earth among us.

I agree we must consider Christ’s eternality, and that God is related to time/space differently than we in time/space relate to eternity. We cannot superimpose chronological time upon eternity, as eternity is best viewed, IMO, as God’s comprehension of past, present and future simultaneously. God is truly omniscient and omnipresent (and omnipotent, of course).

Yet, we cannot escape that fact that our actions are linear with respect to time, and our lives are lived out in a chronological manner. For the Christian, there is a definite point in time in which s/he accepted Christ as Savior, and any point prior to this, by logical implication, defines a condition of not-yet-redeemed. Therefore, any prior natural good action cannot be upgraded to supernatural good, as the individual did not yet possess the means by which to even DO supernatural good prior to salvation.
 
Susanna,

I'm pretty sure I understand what you mean. In the RCC theology Christ has provided redemption already, but the individual must procure it by accepting this redemption upon belief in Christ as Savior.

This is fine, but the way the Pope Francis statement was phrased could be read (as I had) that all are redeemed by natural good works. There needs to be better differentiation in the two separate meanings of "redeemed"/"redemption":


1) Christ has already provided redemption.

Not exactly, as Christ's atoning work has provided the means by which anyone can be redeemed


2) Accepting Christ's atoning work on the Cross provides redemption.

YES!
 
Craig,

The faith/works issue is a very old debate among Catholics and Protestants and I am not going to get into the polemical weeds with you on that score except to say that Catholics regard "works" as "faith in action."

Re:I’ve already addressed the first part. I agree that Christ’s redeeming work on the Cross is retroactive to those in OT times, but I don’t see how this can be applied to an individual post-Cross.....

Whose to say it can't be applied to an individual post-Cross?

A careful study of history will show that even after the Advent of Christ, for centuries, there were entire continents that didn't have access to the Gospels. Our own North American Continent didn't have access to the Gospels until about the 16th century.

And what about the militant atheistic totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century where children were often brought up as "cradle atheists?"

Re:Yet, we cannot escape that fact that our actions are linear with respect to time, and our lives are lived out in a chronological manner. For the Christian, there is a definite point in time in which s/he accepted Christ as Savior, and any point prior to this, by logical implication, defines a condition of not-yet-redeemed. Therefore, any prior natural good action cannot be upgraded to supernatural good, as the individual did not yet possess the means by which to even DO supernatural good prior to salvation.

Our actions may be linear with respect to time, but Christ's are not. Because the God who created "ex nihilo" is outside of time and is also omnipotent, He can upgrade any good He pleases. As C.S. Lewis once put it, God can even "draw straight with crooked lines." :-)
 
How the worm turns......


Code Pink protester shouts at Obama during speech

Published May 23, 2013

Associated Press

President Obama was interrupted three times by a woman who shouted about drones and detainees in Cuba as he delivered a speech on national security.

The woman was identified as Medea Benjamin from the anti-war group Code Pink. Benjamin yelled from behind a bank of cameras before security removed her from the hall at National Defense University in Washington.

Obama said at one point he was willing to "cut the young lady some slack" because the issues he was addressing are worth being passionate about.

Benjamin shouted, quote, "86 were cleared already. Release them today!"

That appears to be a reference to detainees who remain in Cuba despite being cleared for transfer from the facility.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/23/code-pink-protester-shouts-at-obama-during-speech/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Internal+-+Politics+-+Text%29
______________________________

Besides Medea Benjamion and Obama bundler Jodi Evans, Code Pink's co-founders include the "witch" named Starhawk. Code Pink is pals with the Muslim Brotherhood.

January 12, 2010

Code Pink Invites Muslim Brotherhood: 'Join Us in Cleansing Our Country'

http://nation.foxnews.com/code-pink/2010/01/12/code-pink-invites-muslim-brotherhood-join-us-cleansing-our-country
 
Some articles and videos showing what Barbara Marx Hubbard said to the liberal nuns and the reaction to it.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/08/lcwr-assembly-begins-what-their-keynote-speaker-brings-to-the-nuns-video/

124 comments on this one.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/why-liberal-nuns-are-dying-off/

http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/american-nuns-and-the-fate-of-liberal-christianity/
 
While researching this, I found Cumbey's article up at News With Views. http://www.newswithviews.com/Cumbey/constance133.htm
LITTLE SISTERS OF THE NEW WORLD RELIGION
By Attorney Constance Cumbey
March 22, 2013
 
What I think many saw in that Barbara Marx Hubbard speech was similar to the sales pitch found in commercials. She was speaking to an older crowd who were, like her, getting close in age to death, and like many, fearing old age and death. As one writer wrote, it's the same sales pitch given out by those selling beauty products, financial health planners, "healthy eaters", exercise pushers, etc. If you do the right things, you can avoid appearing old and stave off death. Yes, Barbara Marx Hubbard is the queen of the political and "spiritual" New Age pushers, but she also has the television style of late night product pitchmen. Buy her magical New Age products and you will be so superior to your foolish religious neighbors. If she was only a con artist she wouldn't be so dangerous, but as research on her shows, she had led in too many political places.
 
This is quite an excellent article about the nun community, giving an overview of what has happened to turn those grammar school teachers into the Mew Age babbling group they now are, well not all. There are suggested books for follow up.

http://www.beingfrank.co.nz/dont-preach-it-sister

I look forward to the overview article Constance said she was writing.
 
More from the internet. http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/04/nuns-gone-wild-a-trip-down-memory-lane/
 
Susanna,

The faith/works issue is a very old debate among Catholics and Protestants and I am not going to get into the polemical weeds with you on that score except to say that Catholics regard "works" as "faith in action."

Sorry if I conveyed such that I was wanting to debate the RCC vs. Protestant stance, as that was not my intention. But, I think we’d agree that if one professes faith in Jesus Christ yet exhibits no works (excepting death bed conversions), said individual should wonder if s/he is really in the faith, for “faith without works is dead”.

You partially quoting me: Re:I’ve already addressed the first part. I agree that Christ’s redeeming work on the Cross is retroactive to those in OT times, but I don’t see how this can be applied to an individual post-Cross.....

With your response: Whose to say it can't be applied to an individual post-Cross?

To make my position clear so that one doesn’t construe any inconsistencies, while the Cross is certainly retroactive to OT times, the point at which an individual exhibits true faith is the point at which said individual attains salvation. With respect to both OT and NT times, any point prior to salvation/conversion is not (faith) counted as righteousness, no natural work/good performed pre-conversion can count post-conversion as a supernatural work/good (cf Jer. 31:31-34 / Heb. 8:8-12). Similarly, sins committed pre-conversion are not counted against the convert (Heb. 9:14). To believe otherwise is to implicitly deny God’s Justice/Judgment.

A careful study of history will show that even after the Advent of Christ, for centuries, there were entire continents that didn't have access to the Gospels. Our own North American Continent didn't have access to the Gospels until about the 16th century.

This is a different area altogether.
And what about the militant atheistic totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century where children were often brought up as "cradle atheists?"

And, similarly, what of OT pagan societies? The book of Jonah makes it clear just what constitutes redemption/salvation.

Our actions may be linear with respect to time, but Christ's are not. Because the God who created "ex nihilo" is outside of time and is also omnipotent, He can upgrade any good He pleases. As C.S. Lewis once put it, God can even "draw straight with crooked lines." :-)

On this we’ll have to agree to disagree (see my paragraph above beginning “To make my position clear…”).
 
Well, it wasn't just me and the anon who posted the link to the Huff Post article on Pope Francis who've 'misconstrued' his statement. If you read through the comments section of the Huff Post piece, you'll find all kinds of comments taking it such that atheists are also redeemed - in the sense of universalism.

Additionally, as I was getting ready for bed and flipping through the channels of TV, I came across Stephen Colbert who thought the same thing.
 
don't know if this is of any interest here, but the Skagit River Bridge on Interstate 5 in Washington State just collapsed about 7 pm, one section, some cars and people went with it.
 
Brian Swimme, an extremely close associate of Matthew Fox, has had continuing influence on many of the religious orders in the USA, including the Religious Sisters of Mercy. Here is a telling quote from their Institute Leadership Team in 2009:

What about our learnings as vowed religious Sisters of Mercy in this 21st century? We engaged
quite energetically in the Sacred Circles process. We faithfully stayed in the conversations about
new governance structures and shaped six new Communities to ensure participation and processes
to facilitate the quality of our lives together. We continue to probe the challenges and needs inherent in our Critical Concerns with a hope that we are reshaping our response to mission. What have
we learned—what has God stirred in us from all these experiences that we want to remember, hold
sacred and bring into our present and future?
Brian Swimme tells us that the universe is constantly creating ever deeper centers of compassion
and the future is always coming to us. How we choose to respond to each present moment helps
shape what that future will be. The people of the U.S. have made a choice for change in this
moment in history which has already resonated with many in the rest of our world. The Sisters of
Mercy have made choices to enter a new moment in our history. How can we then, as an integral
part of this universe, cooperate and participate in the creation of new centers of compassion that
will respond to the cries of Earth and its people for mercy and justice?


Still researching and writing this topic!

Constance
 
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01534540

http://sacredcirclesonline.org/overview.html

http://sacredcirclesonline.org/performance.html

I noticed the bit about them participating "quite energetically in the Sacred Circles process" so I googled that.

while this could be converted to a biblically orthodox Christian world view approach, you can count on it that it wasn't. The whole focus being community as an end in itself is of course fleshly.
 
Boy Scouts Approve Openly Gay Members:

http://news.msn.com/us/boy-scouts-approve-plan-to-accept-openly-gay-members



The Boy Scouts of America voted Thursday to approve a plan to accept openly gay boys as Scouts, while the ban on gay adult leaders remains....

Liberal Scout leaders - while supporting the proposal to accept gay youth - have made clear they want the ban on gay adults lifted as well.

 
Craig,

Romans 2:14-15

14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.
________________________________

cont..
 
cont...

From the Pope's message about atheists:

"The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can... "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone!".. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html
_________________________________

If it is truly God's law that is written on their hearts while they do natural good works, it is the same God as the God of Christians since there is but one true God. Therefore, the Pope saying "But do good: we will meet one another there.” can hardly be said to go contrary to the Gospels.

RE your comment: With respect to both OT and NT times, any point prior to salvation/conversion is not (faith) counted as righteousness, no natural work/good performed pre-conversion can count post-conversion as a supernatural work/good (cf Jer. 31:31-34 / Heb. 8:8-12). Similarly, sins committed pre-conversion are not counted against the convert (Heb. 9:14). To believe otherwise is to implicitly deny God’s Justice/Judgment.

Here Jeremiah is saying that believers will be spiritually given a new heart and that God will write the law of the New Covenant - the Law of Love - on those hearts in a manner similar to the way in which the natural law has always been written on the hearts of men.


cont....
 
cont..

The following article is by a non-Catholic Christian associate professor in the department of Christian studies, Union University
and the author of the forthcoming Retrieving the Natural Law: A Return to Moral First Things.

PROTESTANTS AND THE NATURAL LAW

.....The law that stands behind the Ten Commandments, according to Luther, “was in force prior to Moses from the beginning of the world and also among all the Gentiles.” Indeed, he adds, “We will regard Moses as a teacher, but we will not regard him as our lawgiver-unless he agrees with both the New Testament and the natural law.” And where the Mosaic law and the natural law are one, “there the law remains and is not abrogated externally.” Luther's position is unambiguous: The moral norms that apply to all people, Christians and non-Christians, are the same. There are not two ethical standards that exist within the realm of divine revelation.

Luther adopts the basic definition of natural law set forth in Philip Melanchthon's commentary on Romans 2:15, for the natural law is “a common judgment to which all men alike assent, and therefore one which God has inscribed upon the soul of each man.” “Everyone,” observes Luther, “must acknowledge that what the natural law says is right and true.” All carry along with them “in the depth of their hearts a living book which could give them quite adequate instruction about what they ought to do and not to do, how they ought to judge, and what ought to be accepted and rejected.” There is no person who does not sense the effects of the natural law.

Luther is well aware of the common misperception among religiously minded people that “natural law” is presupposed by only “Christian” societies. To the contrary, he insists, it is verified by human experience that all nations and all cultures possess this rudimentary knowledge. The natural law “is written in the depth of the heart and cannot be erased.” In fact, people bring this awareness, this natural moral sense, when they come into the world. Although this natural law was merely concretized through the Decalogue on Mount Sinai, nations knew of the moral realities behind these laws before the law formally was given to Israel....read more...


http://www.firstthings.com/article/2007/01/protestants-and-natural-law-39

cont...
 
cont...






Again, "evil" by itself is nothing. When a person is converted, the whole person is converted.

God forgives and blots out evil but keeps whatever is truly good. If He does, it is because everything that is truly good is good only by participation in His own goodness......including natural goodness.

Therefore, it is not a denial of God's justice to say that the natural good works done by pagans or atheists pre-conversion in conformity with the natural law created by God are sanctified by God post-conversion.

We can respectfully agree to disagree, but just for the sake of clarity with regard to Catholic belief, here is the Catholic belief on justification as defined in the Catholic Encyclopedia which gets into precisely some of the things we are discussing.
By the way, I want to be sure that you inderstand that in the article, the word "heretic" is used in the strictest sense of the term to refer to a baptized Catholic who has fallen into error and/or apostatised. The Catholic Church does not refer to "cradle Protestants" as "heretics," but rather as "material schismatics."

JUSTIFICATION

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm
__________________________________

SANCTIFYING GRACE

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06701a.htm
______________________________

REDEMPTION

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12677d.htm
_______________________________

Regarding the Pope....... just because more than one person is trying to spin the Pope's statements about atheists doing good works into "universalism," this doesn't prove that the Pope was promoting universalism.

I find it "disturbing" that certain Protestants so frequently claim to be "disturbed" over things said by the Pope. It is no big secret that Catholics and Protestants have their disagreements, so what's up with that? I wonder how Protestants would like it if nearly every statement made by their more prominent Pastors and Christian leaders were spun by Catholics in such a way as to make it appear that they were saying something that went contrary to the Gospels??

By the way, the word "Catholic" means "universal." Universal for Catholics is not the same thing as Universalism. If it were, Catholics would not believe in Hell. The Pope certainly believes in Hell and has been frequently mentioning the devil in his homilies.

Battle with the devil: Pope Francis frames the fight in Jesuit terms

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1301741.htm
________________________________

"Universal" for Catholics primarily means that the Christian message is true at all times and in all places. It also means that everything truly good is to be embraced wherever it may be found in the universe.

 
Susanna,

I think you’re misunderstanding me here; perhaps I’m just not being clear. I’m not out to ‘bash’ the RCC (not saying you’re thinking this either necessarily), though I do not believe all of its tenets, of course. I’ve been trying to better understand it. I know that universalism is NOT one of its tenets, however.

Regarding the Pope....... just because more than one person is trying to spin the Pope's statements about atheists doing good works into "universalism," this doesn't prove that the Pope was promoting universalism.

I’m not trying to ‘prove’ the Pope was actually intending to promote universalism; I’m trying to illustrate that his statements were sufficiently unclear (for whatever the reason: poor translation, misquoting, etc.) that others understood him as explicitly promoting universalism. Were they purposely trying to spin his statement? I dunno; but, from my point of view, I DID understand the statement as promoting universalism, and, knowing this is NOT the RCC belief, I was disturbed by it. I kept trying to figure out what the Pope was getting out. Your explanations have helped immensely, so thank you!

Colbert, who claimed to have been raised Catholic, expressed shock at the statement, saying (in so many words), “Why did I invest the time at Church, when it doesn’t matter if one believes in God or not? I could have been doing other things such as…”

If/Given that Pope Francis had intended this as a way to reach out to non-Christians, then there’s nothing wrong with that, of course. However, if in reaching out some of these have misunderstood him to think it doesn’t matter what they believe, then he missed the target – at least with those who’ve misunderstood it.
 
Also, I'm aware of the meaning of "Catholic", as I've used it in an article I wrote, contrasting it with "catholic":

...The ecumenical creeds – those accepted by the Church catholic, as in universal, and not merely the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) but to also include Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches – have largely been uncontested over the centuries as to their veracity...

But, thanks anyway, as there are undoubtedly other readers unaware. I was also aware of the multiple meanings of "heretic", so I understood its meaning in the context.

I've only skimmed some of the articles you reference (no time at present), but I'll look them over later.
 
Susanna,

God forgives and blots out evil but keeps whatever is truly good. If He does, it is because everything that is truly good is good only by participation in His own goodness......including natural goodness.

Essentially, the way I see this (and understand Romans 2:14-15), the idea is that everyone has a God-given conscience.

I understand much better the Catholic argument on this subject, yet I remain unpersuaded of the belief myself. And, I don't think that Luther (not that I agree with all things Luther) meant that new believers will have their former natural good works sanctified upon conversion, though acknowledging natural good works as well. But, I don't know for sure unless I read more on his specific views on this.
 
To Susanna & Craig:

Thank you both for an excellent and extremely informative debate.

It was very refreshing to read such a calm, intelligent exchange. I have learned so much from both of you.
 
I see this whole thing about "good works" being part of the works righteousness argument, RC allegedly salvation by works, protestant salvation by faith only, which ignores what Paul DEFINED as "dead works of The Law."

With one exception (which taken in context of the rest of his writings and therefore the rest of his verbal teaching, so the message the receivers of the letter got was the same anyway) Paul listed under "works" the food laws, circumcision, and keeping the Mosaic ritual calendar.

And pointed out that Abraham's work of circumcision was done by faith, that is, in response to God's order, received by Abraham who acted on it because of his already existing faith in God to Whom he listened and counted worthy of listening to.

"faith without works is dead" said James, and there is no conflict, because there are two Greek words for faith, usually or always the one used by Jesus (or the Aramaic word translated with this one) means turning to the object of faith, ergo, it is a "holisitc" to borrow a New Age word, concept, you believe you act, but Paul uses a word to people who are perhaps more fragmented in their styles of thinking and feeling than the Jews were. The second word refers to a kind of belief that results in a change of action.

If you believe the light switch will work, is what will turn the lights on, you use it. If not, you don't.

The works are an outgrowth of the faith, and are therefore both a fruit of it, and a proof of it. No works? probably little or no faith.

All action incl. words begins in the mind, and Paul says in Romans we must "be transformed by the renewal of your mind," the big practical error of the gnostics (and extreme faith only never mind what you do type protestantism has been diagnosed as a kind of gnosticism) was to think that evil is from material physical existence, and not from the spiritual side. Indeed, the physical is neutral as a tool, or good because a creature of God. All good and evil begin in the realm of spirit or mind and are then played out in the physical realm.

Now, if someone has been hardwired by the grace of God to tend towards good, or starts following some light God gives them, that person may not be redeemed AT THAT POINT IN TIME, but as they follow God's light and get more and more, and move away from the false light and from darkness, they will come to Christ and be saved from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of Christ.

This final event (which is itself a new beginning the start of a walk in Christ which is not final till the Last Judgement), may possibly happen at death, when the person who never heard the Gospel meets Christ and recognizes Him as the presence back of the good inclinations they followed in their lives.

Good works often have mixed motives, no one is pure, and this is a matter that the saved become more conscious of and try to correct with God's help.

Obviously, going through the motions of fasts, vigils, church attendance, formal recited prayers, while one does this only because one doesn't want flack from the peer group, is a dead work also, but it may touch and trigger something of God in the person doing it.
 
My guess is the woman didn't spend a lot of time debating Catholic beliefs. She just lived them. http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/05/24/catholic-faith-helped-woman-confront-attackers/
 
Craig,

Re:I think you’re misunderstanding me here; perhaps I’m just not being clear. I’m not out to ‘bash’ the RCC .......

I wasn't my intention to refer to you personally because you haven't been engaging in RCC bashing. You have been a respectful Christian gentleman in this very interesting discussion and I want you to know that I appreciate that.

Moreover, you are not the one who wrote the news article(s) in question. Huffington Post did.

My problem is more with certain members of the news media who in the past have misrepresented Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI on more than one occasion.

In any case, when all is said and done, I worship Christ, not the Pope, and I am allowed to respectfully disagree with the Pope in matters that do not fall under the purview of what Catholics believe to be the Papal Charism of Infallibility which is very narrowly and precisely defined.

One of the reasons I selected those articles I linked you to is because some of them contain the views of the original Protestant Reformers and cite some of their actual writings with a view to comparing Roman Catholic and Protestant beliefs. I am glad if you found them useful.

Have a great Memorial Day Weekend everyone!!!!
 
http://www.christianpost.com/news/atheist-tornado-survivor-in-wolf-blitzer-interview-sees-thousands-of-dollars-in-donations-96602/

Speaking of atheists......the actual interview was interesting!

With regard to Barb Marx Hubbard, as old as she is, she's not wasting a moment of time in her quest to spread her dangerous thoughts and plans. Its all about networking with these people. The state of technology nowadays has made her work all the more easy. And there are sooooo many who are of the same persuasion. Honestly, it frightening. A lot of the time she is just behind the curtain !

from OZ
 
the only reason the atheist community can respond with help for the tornado victims instead of sitting around in bars and chat rooms mocking believers as they put it, is because they have a Christian model to imitate!
 
There are many many people out there who simply can't grasp the concept of a creator. I'm sure many of them are very generous, kind etc but what I think happens in a case like this one (the tornado incident) is that 'others' make the very most of and take advantage of a fairly simple case of mistaken views. I could see this being one of those opportune moments for actual New Agers to stir the pot ( and no, I don't believe all atheists are New Agers). Any opportunity available, they'll take and this one was too delicious to ignore! You are correct of course in saying that they have a good Christian model to imitate Christine. I have to say that much of what the New Agers do is to imitate Christianity but its skewed and the young people that they nab are none the wiser, unfortunately. It makes me cross.

from OZ
 
But God....still has hearts that are moved to respond--don't forget them though their stories are not always told. God has always had a Witness out there and they shine His Glory in the face of unbelief and tyranny and even "so-called" good many self-righteous types from all camps want credit for.
 
Big difference between what the atheists are doing and what the Christian and Jewish communities are doing to help. They are raising money for her and not for the victims. They are paying her off for speaking out. Read the paragraph starting with "The story..." Confusion here. Secular does not mean atheist. Atheists are people who think about the question and say there is no God. Probably most secular people are agnostics who see the world around them and don't think about religion daily. Most people actually lead secular lives. The fund is to support her and is not going into a pot to help others, a rather selfish act on the part of open atheists. Christine here is closer to the truth. Many Christian and Jewish groups under their names are helping under those banners, but most likely most are helping because we still live in a community shaped by Christian and Jewish values. They are not sending money to the Red Cross or the Salvation Army with a note saying they are doing this because they are Christians. Separating the social justice message from Christianity and Judaism is delicate.
 
"most likely most are helping because we still live in a community shaped by Christian and Jewish values"

exactly, the human rights and kindness and so forth values liberals and agnostics uphold, they got from Christianity and Judaism influence on the society around them, on the writers they were influenced by, and so forth.
 
So much for atheist caring about the destroyed in Moore. http://www.palookavillepost.com/2013/05/25/teacher-fired-for-praying-in-school-during-oklahoma-tornado/

"The family, who’s name is being kept anonymous for their own protection, filed the complaint with the school through an ACLU attorney even though the teacher was responsible for saving the life of their six year old child."
 
I just found out that the story may be a hoax, though that is not clear yet. Why is it so believable? http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/hoax-update-reports-of-a-teacher-being-fired-in-oklahoma-for-praying-prior-to-tornado-are-likely-false-2661376.html
 
I would think it would be too soon for a firing to happen, but it may be someone is making a fuss about praying. It is believable, because there are people out there who would make such a complaint, there has been a long war publicly against Christianity and prayer in schools and in public events. No longer an undercurrent of subtle persuasion through books and comments, but open demands and court actions.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iETg-9K51Wc

very important examination of the teachings of Copeland, Hinn, Hagin and others, note that Earl Paulk is mentioned because in addition to being an MSOG teacher, he is also a word of faith teacher.
 
Xbox? More like Xbody: Future game consoles will get under your skin

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/xbox-more-xbody-future-game-consoles-will-get-under-your-6C10058884
 
Murdered U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens had a “very romantic relationship” with (mystical) Islam...

according to a Libyan official who was a personal friend to the late American representative to Benghazi.

“What I am saying is that his Excellency, the late ambassador, had a very personal private matter, a very romantic relationship with the mystical side of Islam,” stated Sabri Malek, the spokesman for the Democratic Party in Libya, in an interview today.

Malek was speaking on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio.

Continued Malek: “Many Westerners find themselves converging on a romantic relationship with the mystical side of Islam. Sufism, it’s a very unique corridor. It allows you to find out more beyond your ego fears. So that kind of mysticism was very attractive to the ambassador.

“And he indulged through various Sufi channels,” said Malek. “Because Libya is one of the richest North African states in the source of such schools.”

http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/murdered-u-s-ambassador-stevens-a-muslim/

Dave in CA
 
More on the Kaitlyn Hunt case:

The parents of the 18 year old and their supporters have been on a smear campaign with the “Stop the Hate, Free Kate” propaganda, to include spreading outright lies about the facts of the case itself (including ages of both girls) and making allegations that the parents of the 14 year old girl sought criminal actions strictly because of the homosexual nature of the relationship. Following is a short list of lies perpetuated by the Hunt family and supporters, further perpetuated by some irresponsible ‘official’ media outlets, with corresponding truths:

1) FALSE CLAIM: The other parents (and/or the DA’s office) are only pushing charges because they're bigoted and anti-gay.

TRUTH: The parents of the 14 year old, the Smiths, have claimed this is not the case. While it’s possible the Smiths are not being entirely truthful, for the Hunts to make this charge without some sort of ‘proof’ is potentially libelous/slanderous.

2) FALSE CLAIM: The girls were 17 and 15 (or 17 and 14) at the time of the relationship (or during the bulk of the relationship).

TRUTH: They were 18 and 14 respectively as per the arrest affidavit [WARNING: sexual details], as Kaitlyn’s DOB is listed as 8/14/94; the relationship is reported to have begun in November of 2012, turning sexual in December 2012 (in a school bathroom). Judging by some comments, it appears that the 14 year old turned 15 around March or April of this year; therefore, there is, by my calculations, roughly 3 years and 7 months between the two girls’ ages. In the arrest affidavit, the officer asked Kaitlyn if she knew it was wrong to have sex with the younger girl given her age, with Kaitlyn’s response that she “didn’t think about it” because the 14 year old “acted older”.

3) FALSE CLAIM: The other parents maliciously waited until Kaitlyn turned 18 so they could get her charged with a crime.

TRUTH: Kaitlyn was 18 the entire time, as the above indicates. In an interview, the Smiths assert they told Kaitlyn to stay away from their daughter (my question: why didn’t they try to contact her parents?) on two separate occasions before January 4th, on which date the parents discovered their daughter missing. In the interview, the Smiths claim they assumed the worst, that someone had abducted their daughter; so, she was reported missing. Found “safe” at the Hunt residence the whole time (not clear on how long), it was revealed per the affidavit that they had sex. My question: where were Kaitlyn’s parents while this was going on? Are they potentially liable for being complicit?

4) FALSE CLAIM: She's being charged just for things such as holding hands and kissing.

TRUTH: Once again, the affidavit proves this false.

cont:

 
cont:

5) FALSE CLAIM: It was consensual relationship; it cannot be considered predatory.

TRUTH: The age of consent in Florida is 18. In Florida, legally, a 14 year old lacks the capacity to consent to a sexual relationship of any type. While there are exceptions for individuals up to 23 years of age to have sexual relationships with others as young as 16 or 17, there is NO exception regarding 14 year olds.

Just because the two in question knew each other does not rule out the possibility of this being predatory. The 18 year old is the adult, the 14 year old the child, as per law. Just imagine yourself as a (very impressionable) 14 year old freshman who receives attention from an attractive senior who is very popular to boot. Is it possible the 18 year old used both her age and her position of influence (popularity) to lure the younger one? I’d think so.


The bottom line: The irresponsible media picks up on the "poor, victimized gay girl" story without even attempting to confirm facts, while homosexual advocates jump in the fray, leaving the Smiths with little choice but to come out and make some kind of statement. Sadly, some have stooped so low as to publish the victim’s name, her parents’ names, as well as their address and phone number on social media as a way to directly harass the Smiths.

So, who’s “intolerant”?

Read more here:

http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/317647/19/Online-support-grows-for-student-facing-sex-charges

http://theothermccain.com/2013/05/23/damn-you-freekate-liars/

http://spectator.org/blog/2013/05/25/lesbian-teen-kaitlyn-hunt

For info on the so-called “Romeo and Juliet” laws

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/25/kaitlyn-hunt-and-the-romeo-and-juliet-problem/

…the law provides no relief in the form of an instant “not guilty” finding. The laws still stand as described. This only involves whether or not the perpetrator will wind up on the sex offender registry. And even then, it only allows them to petition to be taken off the list. It’s not automatic.

The above is one of the few forums that contains many rational comments.

 
Arrest affidavit did not hyperlink for some reason, so here it is (again, WARNING: sexually descriptive):

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/21/us/hunt-arrest-affidavit.html?_r=0
 
Warning: Banks are targeting conservative groups who want to set up accounts. Yesterday I found the information on Facebook. Conservative sites on Facebook are a good source of information on what is happening regarding New Age attacks. This is still the best site regarding infiltration into religious groups.
 
Christine,

Of course, the SACRED CIRCLES were not a manifestation of orthodox Christianity of any type. Brian Swimme is a BIG NEW AGER, closely associated with Matthew Fox and the rest of the sneering herd.

Constance
 
OF course. my point was, you COULD rework such "sacred circles" idea to be orthodox Christian, BUT you could be sure with those ladies it wouldn't be, given what all else they are saying.

There is a strange focus on "community," when in fact people need to be in the habit of being individuals, who can stand against evil and have a difficult to compromise sense of personal individual identity, AFTER which are their relationships and responsibilities.
 
Interesting. I put a detailed comment up last night about CHANGING IMAGES OF MAN and comments about a changed image of man always being a necessary ingredient of totalitarianism. I don't see it although it showed successful posting last night. I'm going to see why it didn't last up here.

Constance
 
Media Coverage Blackout Over Anti-Monsanto Protests

http://naturalsociety.com/media-coverage-blackout-anti-monsanto-protests/

The March Against Monsanto / GMO Rally was held last Saturday, May 25th in 52 countries and 436 cities all across the globe!!!

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/national_world&id=9100841

http://www.naturalnews.com/040467_March_Against_Monsanto_GMO_rally.html

 
Speaking of Monsanto and GMOs, here's the full-length Seeds of Death:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUd9rRSLY4A
 
Constance,

If I'm not mistaken, I believe you posted those comments on the CHANGING IMAGES OF MAN on the immediately preceding thread.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6-kK8i4yc8

dangers of reiki, this person was deceived into doing this for Jesus and others are bringing it into the churches, she notes it tends to go hand in hand with yoga, in my own experience, interest in the merely physical yoga quickly exposes you to the other forms. mylittleoso@msn.com is the speaker interviewed, can help others get away from this or oppose it in their churches.

I noticed, when I was looking into feri witchcraft because of its links to some other stuff I was opposing, that reiki is a big deal with a lot of them, and both systems depends on receiving a "current."
 
TWO IMPORTANT THINGS FOR CONSIDERATION by researchers.

"we are looking for inconsistencies or things left unsaid or unexplained." this or course would involve more than analyzing single blog posts but is a general principle when you are looking for something that may be hiding either outright hidden, but operating in a group or a person's motives, or hiding in plain sight.

"new facts may emerge which may have little to do with the original subject of the investigation." which of course lead to more interesting stuff perhaps than what you were looking for.

(Henry Stevens, DARK STAR)
 
Javier Solana has a new post today about the protests in France against the new gay marriage legislation. Take note the last paragraph which is his remedy for the situation. You can copy and paste it in google tranlate into english.

http://javiersolana.esadeblogs.com/
 
To John Rupp,

THANKS!

Constance
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]