www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Cardinal O'Malley

30 years ago conservative Catholics wondered if the American liberals would go into schism, conservative Catholics defining themselves as "Roman Catholics" vs. the liberal "American Catholics." Probably not, because although they seem to have gotten a second wind under Pope Francis (another Paul VI, again not as liberal as the media are depicting him; they'll probably turn on him as he does his job defending the faith on hot issues, as they did to Paul VI) they are still fading away, like the mainline Protestants. There just aren't that many of them to matter, even if some of them are cardinals. For example, many nuns are liberal but there are next to no nuns anymore.

And there others, neither liberal nor conservative who, like Pope Francis, quietly go about fostering a Catholic Christianity which is humble, direct, sincere and unadorned by the pious pomp of pharisaism and its attendant rancor.

Fine. While you're at it, why not take the good bishop to a dog fight with pit bulls next week? After all, he wouldn't actually have a dog in the fight, would he?

You really don't get it, do you? We DON'T LEGITIMIZE HERETICS by hobnobbing with them theologically. What the bishop did was to make this deceived woman think she really and truly has some sort of sacramental legitimacy!!

So I'm a crank for bringing this up???

I guess St. Paul would be considered a crank, too!

Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

Or doesn't her little act of self-centered "ordination" qualify as a "work of darkness?"

Sheeeeesh!!!

I certainly do, and your eloquent post is proof positive. St. Paul, indeed!

Fine, you go play with them. You will have to put a gun to my head and then drag my dead body into one of their pagan temples before I voluntarily give credence to their nonsense.

Oh, and PS....

That USED TO BE Catholicism!!!

Protestant Churches are now pagan temples? While they are in error they are still our brothers in Christ. How many do you hope to convert with insults?

While insults are never desirable, I think more Catholics might be prone to leave the Church after witnessing a Cardinal having his baptism re-affirmed (whatever that is) by a female Methodist "pastor".....than you would see conversions of protestants to the Catholic Church by condoning such a practice.

Christ is Born!!

I think part of the problem is when ecumenical services move beyond prayers to actions that can be miscontrued. There has been a syncretism that has developed in the minds of many believers over things like this and it goes into areas like intercommunion--which many no longer understand is not something that is to be done. When we look beyond the actual incident mentioned here and seen all over the Internet, we have to ask how far these things can go.

Beyond that, there is the actual question that no one wants to broach: whether we can assume that Baptisms in some Protestant ecclesial communities are actually valid at this time. There have been discussions over the past thirty years about this but they have not come to the light of day because of the fear of stifling ecumenical activity and reopening old polemics. I refer to the fact that many mainline Protestant communities allow Baptism in "The Name of the Creator, the Redeemer, and the Sanctifier" (or similar convoluted terms to avoid "Father" and "Son") in order not to use masculine language in the formula. Radical feminism is strong in some communities and a diversity of practice seems to be tolerated. There has been no secret made of this--it's been reported in religious literature for decades--and some communities even leave the choice to the individual minister. IMHO, it seems to be that we cannot assume that such a Baptism is really what we think it is. Then there is the issue of the certificate given to the candidate simply stating that the Baptism has been performed according to the accepted rite of the particular community. This type of subterfuge just clouds the issue.

So I think there is more here than just brotherly sharing here.

Bob

He received what amounts to a sprinkling of holy water at a service for the renewal of baptismal vows. My guess would be this isn't unusual as most Catholic bishops participate in local clergy associations. The reason this one gets news is because Cardinal O'Malley is one Pope Francis' advisory council. Those who caluminate the Holy Father are going to go after those close to him.

There is no such thing. Our baptism is renewed every time we participate in the Mystery of Holy Confession.


On the contrary, it is very unusual.


I think there are many reasons this one gets news.

Okay. Pagan temples WAS over the top. Nonetheless, there was a time that we didn't call them "separated brethren." There was another word for those who refused the truth of the apostolic faith and determinedly stuck to their errors, despite all efforts to help them see the light of truth.

Is it helpful to this woman to make her think that she is somehow pleasing to God in her rebellion against the truth which is the apostolic (meaning both Orthodox and Catholic) faith? Do we do people favors by making them think they are peachy keen okay in their rebellion against the Church which Christ established upon the Apostles?

More than that, where were the good Catholics and Orthodox when I held such erroneous ideas? Why did they not sit down and tell me "You are wrong. Let me show you why." When I used to go out "witnessing" from my Anabaptist assembly, I can't ever remember meeting one single Catholic (I met no Orthodox ever) who was able to do anything other than give me a deer-in-the-headlights look when I asked them questions about the Bible.

Our Holy Father wants to know why the Church is having problems and losing members. Maybe it's because as Catholics and Orthodox, we A.) don't know our faith B.) don't think it's important to share C.) don't think that there really IS any difference between those in the Church and those who continue in obstinate rebellion against the Church D.) have some kind of syrupy post-modern idea that eventually God, that nice old Deity in the sky, will really let everyone into His Heaven.

As I said, those ideas are neither the thoughts of the Early Fathers nor of the Church in regards to those who would not listen to correction and repent.

I apologize for getting a little over the top in my verbiage, but I think it is high time that those of us in the apostolic churches make it clear that there are condemnations in scripture for those who are rebellious against the Church and who will not listen to God-ordained authority.

And I don't intend to convert any with insults, Father Deacon. This is a private forum belonging to those who hold to the truth. I think that in such family, I can say things that I would not normally say in mixed company.

BTW Father Deacon Lance, is there still a prohibition in the Catholic faith against us attending the services of assemblies that are outside the Church?

I seem to remember that once upon a time, Catholics were not permitted to go to such assemblies.

That you are ignorant of such a thing, does not make it disappear. Liturgicaly the Roman Rite uses them at Confirmation Masses and the Paschal Vigil Mass. Episcopals, Lutherans, Methodists, and Presbyterians also use them.

http://onlineministries.creighton.edu/CollaborativeMinistry/Lent/baptismalpromises.html

http://www.catholic.org/prayers/prayer.php?p=1653

http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/3116/baptism_liturgy.pdf

Bravo!

And thank you!

These forums are public and Christians of all stripes both lurk and participate, so you are in mixed company and should behave accordingly.