(100% true)
I pass the Inspirational Channel and Morris Cerulo saying that he has 1100 Prophecy Bibles only for his partners who will sow $240 into his ministry.
Next channel is EWTN. Fr. Mitch Pascwa is speaking and says that all of us must saturate ourselves in St. Paul’s epistles this year. Every Catholic should read them all.
UPDATE: Now that we’ve all had a chance to vent….:-)…a few thoughts.
The fact that an evangelical is giving away Bibles is distinctive of evangelicalism. Do Catholics ever just give the Bible to people and say “Read it and see what God says to you in it?”
The fact that Cerulo’s Bible has his prophecy notes on each page shows that evangelicals have their little popes and little magisteriums. They just don’t like to admit it.
The fact is that Fr. Mitch can say let’s all read Paul’s letters, but come back and tell him that Paul never says “Peter is the infallible successor to Jesus” anywhere and you’ll find out how far Paul’s epistles actually go.
If you chase this subject, you’ll discover that some RC scholars do a far better job with Paul’s letters than many Protestants.
The Internet Monk Archives 
I pass the Inspirational Channel and Morris Cerulo saying that he has 1100 Prophecy Bibles only for his partners who will sow $240 into his ministry.
When coin in Cerulo’s coffer rings,
Then your soul to Heaven springs…
LikeLike
I have been asked ,”Can a true believer fellowship with those of imperfect doctrine?” I hope so or I will get lonely. Only god is perfect. We need to read the word follow the Spirit and obey to the best of our ability. There is some Salt in every house of the Lord.
Amen Carolyn.
LikeLike
I know lots of church friends who stand firm on their individual doctrinal beliefs….but ‘searching scripture to see if those things be true’ is often left off. So often..we simply take the path of least resistance rather than ‘diligently seeking’ the right path. As I serve others, I no longer say, “You need to be in church.” I say, “You need to be in the Word…..because God (truth)lives there.”
LikeLike
Willow: >>All our denominations are divisions of the body.
Are denominations divisions of the body? Where does the traditional church (like that of the Scribes and Pharisees)end and where does the true Body of Christ begin? I think…..only God knows. As the Body of Christ (lively stones fitly joined together/ Christ as the chief Corner Stone) is ‘in the world but not of the world…I believe individual ‘lively stones’ are in the traditional church…but not of the traditional church!
..Enjoying your comments.
LikeLike
There are a lot of things i just do not understand. I agree with Aliasmoi that the Holy Spirit is our guide to scripture, but I can’t for the life of me grasp why there are so many conflicting beliefs based on the same instruction book. I started out my life as a new Christian in a fundamental background. They had all the answers. Who was saved when, why, how old, how long ,all the answers to everything were in Holy Scripture.
35 years later I find myself a steward of the Mysteries of God.
All our denominations are divisions of the body. That said, I feel my group does it better than yours. Some ego , huh? I swim in the same pool as IMONK because it is a big tent, but I see some trying to tie the flaps shut.
Could it be that God is just too big for us? Let us all try to honor God as best we can. Are those of us here a church? I hope so.
LikeLike
Michael, I do think the point of what Giovanni was saying was “without guidance”, not “giving someone a Bible in itself is bad”.
It’s the meeting on the road to Emmaus – “27And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.”
The two disciples very probably knew the Scriptures for themselves, but they needed guidance as to how to interpret them properly.
That’s all we’re sayin’ 🙂
(Yes, of course, then the argument starts over “But what exactly is the proper interpretation, and who has it?”)
LikeLike
“That’s one amazing statement. “Harmful.†Wow.”
Um – haven’t we been discussing, oh, the guys who take Revelations and run with it to tell us the exact day, hour and minute the end of the world is going to happen?
The discussion about ‘is being a stay-at-home dad a sin’?
Divorce and remarriage – yes? no? maybe?
Abortion – “Jesus says nothing about it!” which yes, I’ve seen used as an argument.
And of course, the great Anglican kerfuffle currently going on about ordaining non-celibate gays to the priesthood – “hey, Scripture says nothing about it!” “Er – this verse here?” “Oh come on, that’s the same as the prohibition against eating shellfish!”
Someone taking a Bible in his or her hand, pulling out a verse, and saying “This proves God wants us to – ” can indeed be harmful.
LikeLike
I don’t have my copy of the book on hand, and I can’t find it in the online edition of the book. But, I believe that Robert Barclay asserts in his Apology that scripture in the hands of one who has not the Spirit is a dangerous thing.
LikeLike
Michael,
“It’s hard not to make this observation: Is the distribution of the scripture OUTSIDE of the context of the church’s teaching authority something the RCC can fully endorse?”
Apart from the teaching authority of the Church? I believe the answer would be no. Yet, from the Catholic’s prerogative, that’s a positive, obeying the injunction of Christ, kinda thing.
Why would one delibrately desire it to be outiside the context of the church except to rid oneself of its authority because they preceive it as wrong (I guess?).
“Historically, the RCC opposed the translation and distribution of the Bible.”
This is a broad (I belive, incorrect) generalization; it opposed translations unauthorized by bishops. There were numerous translations of Scripture in many countries prior to the invention of the printing press and the time of the Reformation. Regarding its distribution, well the times were interesting, were they not?
Historically (500 years ago), from the RCC perspective, the bishops acted to protect the word of God from profanation as well as serving the preservation of the Gospel of Christ. Those on the other side, obviously, would disagree.
“Now that the church is more committed to the average Catholic layperson having the Bible and reading it devotionally, how about the next level: scripture evangelism.”
How about that continuous reading by the bishops and cardinals for starters? That was my point; it is an incredibly exciting form of evangelization!
From my own experience, reliance upon Scripture reading alone, STRATCH THAT, reliance upon:
My NIV Study Bible, my Scofield Study Bible, my Reformation Study Bible, my NASB Study Bible, My Johnny Mac Study Bible, my “fill in the blank” Study Bible, (I had even more, seriously) the myriad of teachers in my place of worship, teachers in those places I visited, multitudes of Christian publishing houses and their books, on many Christian radio staitions, on numerous differing Christian ministries websites, discussion groups and blogs … I was led to some funky places (ie. supralapsarianism). I succeeding in getting really dizzy.
Aside from all this, what witnessed to me MOST in the Catholic evangel was the mass itself; the mass which is infused and saturated in the Word of God. And at the center of it all, I was touched to the core by the sacrament of the WORD, Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.
He, in the center of the mass, I believe is the heart of our evangelism. I guess I could hand out an approved bible (I gave out many bibles in my pre-Catholic days, my husband was a Gideon) as well as a copy of the CCC with it.
My preference though, would be rather to invite a friend to mass, sit in the cry room and excitedly talk them through it.
Sorry this is long.
Peace & Joy in the Trials,
Jenny
ps The suckiness gets better, I promise. It still really stinks though.
LikeLike
IMONK: >>My relationship with God goes on but at a distance I hate to even think about.
IMONK, why the distance? Can you speak to that for me…for understanding only….not debate (smile).
LikeLike
Here is a perspective from North East Pa. Hard coal country has been largely catholic since the immigration of Europeans other than English and Dutch /Germans.
The problem with catholicism is that by and large, it doesn’t work, I mean it doesn’t “take”, it is a social cultural establishment more than a moral spiritual one.
This does not mean it does not work for some. I know nuns who truely are the bride of Christ. There are some catholics who pray with fervor and intensity. It works for them,works like nothing else could,but they seem to be a small minority. With a pastor /parishioner ratio of OVER 2,700 to one and with churches closing monthly it is like they are closing up shop around here.
Our church Dayspring Bible, is comprised of former catholics over 90 %. Nobody pulled them away, it just did not work for them. They were not saved. They had no relationship with Jesus. That doesn’t mean that their mothers or brothers in the RC are not saved. It means they themselves were not.
As Pastor I need to watch during studies for anti -catholic feelings. Some get resentful that their former priest did not parse the Gospel in a way they could understand. I often ask ” were you ready to hear it?”
Thank God that He looks to the heart not to membership cards. Imonk in our area you situation is perhaps more common. Thank God you are yoked to a believer. Membership in a church neither assures or precludes salvation.
LikeLike
The scissors comment, as I read it, was not specifically referring to violence, Michael, but to the start and spread of errors like those mentioned above. All heretics use the Bible as the source of their arguements, from Marcion and Arius to Jim Jones and David Koresh. It isn’t to say that absolute Orthodoxy guarantees right behavior (Alexander VI was confessionally immaculate, but a truly awful example of a Christian), but heterodoxy is directly damaging to the soul, dangerous in the same way stabbing oneself with scissors is (hence the analogy). Actual violence doesn’t enter into the equation.
LikeLike
Yes, of course. I am not a sedevacantist or a semi-schismatic like the SSPX. I am a traditional Roman Catholic, I prefer the TLM but fully acknoledge the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo of Vatican II.
I tend to disagree with Father Ernesto on this point. I don’t think that the Protestant idea of scripture for all worked quite the way they thought it should.
Unlike the Foxes book of Martyrs and the other things mentioned the early heretics were very real and to this day we have the reminence of their legacy. The Unitarians who are Arians and part of the C of E that seems bent on becoming the new Gnostics.
Besides you wanted examples of how Scripture without a proper teaching can be dangerous I can see no better example of that than all those who claim to know a “greater truth” than that to which the Church upholds.
LikeLike
Hmm, a quick note on your reply to Giovanni. Yes, sadly, we have also had to repent for some of the atrocities we committed in the Lord’s name. Our Patriarchs, like the Pope, have acknowledged some of the past sin. We just simply get less coverage. GRIN.
But–to support Roman Catholics–the two previous Popes made various journeys whose purpose was to go, like penitent pilgrims, and make their repentance. One of the most famous trips was the trip that Pope John Paul II took to Israel and to the Wailing Wall. Substantial healing was brought there. For us Eastern Orthodox, the return of the bones of two of our famous saintly forebears to us (the Crusaders did some grave-robbing) was a great event. They were re-buried with great honor, back home finally.
No, we are not perfect. But, we are the Church (this is not meant in an exclusionary way). We clearly forgot that we were the Church Militant and thought we were the Church Glorious, but God has been gracious and kind to us, even when He disciplined us.
LikeLike
Joe, history (especially early-church history) shows how amazingly difficult a time people had understanding and following Jesus, and how many different and heretical interpretations people discovered from the texts and then preached, all the while claiming their authority from the Spirit or superior exegesis. Fact is, I think a certain type of person is always going to assume that their interpretive innovation is always The Real Orthodoxy and puff themselves up to teach others, whose temperments run more fictile or sheeply. If it weren’t for church authority to tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about, I’m sure I’d take money for preaching educated foolishness on a Scriptural tip; I wouldn’t know better. And lots of people who read and teach the Bible out there don’t really seem to “know better”, either.
LikeLike
Giovanni:
Forgive me if I have misread some past posts but I want to make sure I understand you.
Do you accept the validity of Vatican II and do you accept Benedict 16 as a legitimate Pope? IOWs, are you currently in communion with a church that is in communion with the current bishop of Rome, B16?
LikeLike
Oh come on people. Naming heresies? Are you seriously wanting someone to just start pasting Foxes Book of Martyrs or stories of the Conquistadors or the inquisition on here?
Good grief. The same “authorities” that insured unity burned heretics.
And we have our witch trials and our anti-Catholic violence.
Let’s just avoid that entire approach please.
LikeLike
There is little doubt that among both us Eastern Orthodox, and among Roman Catholics, the Western Middle Ages, and the Eastern Church under the Turkocracia were not as concerned with Scripture as they ought to have been (except among the monks who kept to the daily reading of Scriptures through the centuries). And, it is also true that at various times the Church seemed to discourage the private reading of Scripture. As we look back, we are not proud of that.
However, one of the facts that many do not want to acknowledge is that the Reformation was a great success in calling the Church back to the regular study of the Scriptures in the entire Church. It may have taken until the 20th century for it to fully happen among us, but it did happen. (I will mention that the public reading of Scriptures in the worship NEVER left.) Congratulations, you won that fight!
Nevertheless, the expected result was not that everyone became Protestant. Rather, the resurgence in Scripture reading and study brought a resurgence also in the study of the Early Church Fathers. And, behold, our studies only reinforced many of our views. And, where they did not reinforce, there have been many changes. Yes, the Reformation did have its effect, we have become more Biblical and more in accord with the Church of those first couple of centuries.
But, as Protestants have found out to their chagrin, reading Scripture outside of the context of the other people who wrote around that time, outside of the context of the worship practices of the Church around that time, outside of the context of the organizational practices of the Church around that time, outside of the context of the community at that time is a sure way to guarantee the unending multiplication of communities that has plagued the Church since the Reformation. That context is called Holy Tradition.
Holy Tradition is not uniform. The Church has misused it at times. (In fact, that is one of the things the Eastern Orthodox claim the Roman Catholic Church has done too often.) But that multiple rooted Tradition provides the context within which Scripture is read. Finally, the Ecumenical Councils provide the solid skeleton, the Deposit of Faith, upon which our Scriptural interpretation is hung. (Note: in actuality, with few exceptions, Protestants agree with all but the Seventh Council.)
We are a long way from perfect. We rely–as we Eastern Orthodox phrase it–on God’s Great Mercy. But, there is much we have learned. There is much that has changed. There were various points where the Reformation was correct to call for Reform. But, and most important, the resulting fragmented movement also shows that there were some great fallacies which need correcting, among which is the fallacy that Scripture is a matter of individual interpretation outside of an Early Church context, the fallacy that individual conscience trumps Church authority at every turn, and the fallacy that the individual, in and by themself, is fully capable of expressing the Church and suffering no ill-effects thereby.
LikeLike
I am Roman Catholic and I stand by my statement. Wars and atrocities have been commited in the name of the words that are writen in the Holy book.
You don’t simply hand somebody a Bible and go on your marry way that is irresponsible. And here are a few reasons why.
Adoptionism
Arianism
Donatism
Bogomils
Docetism
Nestorianism
Pelagianism
Manichaeism
Monophysitism
Monothelitism
Psilanthropism
LikeLike
I respect the Catholic Church, but Catholics who say things like, “The Holy Bible without proper guidance can be as harmful as giving a 4 year old scissors and tell him to run around in circles as fast as he can†simply betray either unfamiliarity with or forgetfulness of the plain fact of the power of Scripture. Either is a severe problem.
Joe, on the surface that sounds good, until you consider that lack of guidance produced Charles Taze Russell. Protestants usually do have some sort of guidance; it’s just less overt.
LikeLike
Jeff M, I don’t think there’s any indication that Paul expected that HE was writing Scripture when he wrote that passage, do you? I think it’s more likely he was talking about what we call the Old Testament; interestingly enough, the book of Timothy (as well as the other Pauline epistles) was not considered Scripture by some groups within the early church, who maintained this view even after the councils established them as such.
I think that Paul was interested in characterizing the preaching and teaching of Jesus as intimately intertwined with (but not circumscribed by) the established, written Word, to the proselytized Gentiles. When he calls Scripture “God-breathed” in his letter, he’s essentially affirming it’s importance for Gentile converts, too – who wouldn’t necessarily be familiar with it as such. If anything, the story he recounts in Galatians reveals just how like us the Apostles were (men, weak and prone to compromise, even with God’s help and Jesus’ firsthand instruction); it took Paul’s admonition to remind everybody of the difference between discipleship by grace and fuzzy obedience to mere custom. He’d already been a Christian evangelist for at least 14 years by that point, and he was never a coward about speaking his mind; even the least of the Apostles wouldn’t by shy about dealing with a problem like that though.
LikeLike
Today, I saw a man carrying a Bible into my Catholic Church for Mass, and I said to my wife – “that must be a protestant visitor!â€
Hee hee! Paul, I did that the first time I went to a Mass. I was so used to taking a Bible to church that I toted my trusty King Jimmy along with me. Long about the psalm I realized that everyone else was just following along in the missalette.
(And I also tried to strike up a conversation during the sign of peace. Lot to learn…)
LikeLike
I respect the Catholic Church, but Catholics who say things like, “The Holy Bible without proper guidance can be as harmful as giving a 4 year old scissors and tell him to run around in circles as fast as he can” simply betray either unfamiliarity with or forgetfulness of the plain fact of the power of Scripture. Either is a severe problem.
For an excellent rejoinder found in Karl Keating’s mag, check out this terrific reminder:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0102fea1.asp
LikeLike
Sorry about the large quote. I’ll be careful of that in the future.
Of course there is. Human beings are human beings, no matter what. There’s no question of that. In fact, I don’t even understand your question. My point wasn’t that Magisterial authority makes people perfect, if that’s what you were going for.
Pax et bonum,
SU
LikeLike
Paul, by his own word, was the least of the Apostles. Why should I look to him over the Gospels? The Epistles are great supporting documents for the Gospels, but they are inherantly secondary and dependent documents.
This is a confusing statement. I don’t remember any part of the Bible being “secondary”. Paul says that all Scripture is God-breathed. When you read Galatians, you find Paul rebuking Peter and generally not acting like he is the “least of the apostles”. He says that Peter was only sent to Jews and he is responsible for the gospel message to the Gentiles. That makes for some interesting questions to say the least.
LikeLike
Thanks Jenna. It is flat out horrible. My relationship with God goes on, but at a distance that I hate to even think about.
LikeLike
>>The Holy Bible without proper guidance can be as harmful as giving a 4 year old scissors and tell him to run around in circles as fast as he can.
>Thanks for reminding me why I’ll stay right where I am in the body of Christ.
Without knowing what branch of what church Giovanni professes, and without defending that statement of his straight up: Having come into contact with a set of books from Jimmy and Frances Swaggart recently, I do have to go so far as to say that anyone attempting to interpret the Bible desperately needs some guide from orthodox tradition. Humility helps too. It’s a beautiful, powerful, true, and extremely complicated book. Few of the cardinal statements of Christianity are written bluntly or didactically on its pages.
I was raised a staunch and Biblically informed Baptist and recently, to the heartbreak of my parents, became a Catholic. For me, reading the Bible and looking at Bible, faith and church in the context of history left me thinking “I didn’t know, I just didn’t know…” and no real choice but to join. I fell in love with the Church as well.
The evangelicals I’ve known and grown up with are almost all devout, loving, Bible-believing, Bible-living people. There have been a few that have attempted to use Christianity to make their life “work”, which, I hardly need add, doesn’t work. How stoppable the general trend toward liberalism may be … well, the ship won’t go down with my parents still alive.
I see the same ‘devout, loving, Bible-believing, Bible-living’ spirit in the Catholics I know. Granted, I seem to always know the ‘best of the best’ in both worlds–or maybe it’s just my innate optimism. But while I certainly wouldn’t say denomination is irrelevant, I would say that the grace of God is evident wherever the truth of Christ is wholeheartedly believed. Even–since we’re all human, and clearly either the Catholics or the Protestants have got some important things wrong–when that truth is imperfectly understood.
Mr. Spencer, from my experience I know some part of what you and your wife must be going through. You both have my prayers.
From one who has read often and respected the iMonk, though never commented,
–Jenna
LikeLike
Sam,
Please don’t post lengthy quotes. Link them. I won’t post another one.
And do you think there’s any historical evidence of violence done by those whose understanding of the Bible was guided by the proper teaching authority? From both RC history and Protestant history?
Sola Scriptura is not “scripture alone.”
MS
LikeLike
“A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.”
I think it’s pretty hard to contest based on history that people armed with the Scriptures can be very harmful, to themselves and others. The Millerites spring to mind as a good example, among countless others throughout the Church’s lifetime. As Clement of Alexandria says concerning heretical uses of Scripture:
“… But if it is not enough merely to state the opinion, but if what is stated must be confirmed, we do not wait for the testimony of men, but we establish the matter that is in question by the voice of the Lord, which is the surest of all demonstrations, or rather is the only demonstration; in which knowledge those who have merely tasted the Scriptures are believers; while those who, having advanced further, and become correct expounders of the truth, are [the true] Gnostics.* Since also, in what pertains to life, craftsmen are superior to ordinary people, and model what is beyond common notions; so, consequently, we also, giving a complete exhibition of the Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, from faith persuade by demonstration.
And if those also who follow heresies venture to avail themselves of the prophetic Scriptures; in the first place they will not make use of all the Scriptures, and then they will not quote them entire, nor as the body and texture of prophecy prescribe. But, selecting ambiguous expressions, they wrest them to their own opinions, gathering a few expressions here and there; not looking to the sense, but making use of the mere words. For in almost all the quotations they make, you will find that they attend to the names alone, while they alter the meanings; neither knowing, as they affirm, nor using the quotations they adduce, according to their true nature.
But the truth is not found by changing the meanings (for so people subvert all true teaching), but in the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the Sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points demonstrated in the Scriptures again from similar Scriptures. Neither, then, do they want to turn to the truth, being ashamed to abandon the claims of self-love; nor are they able to manage their opinions, by doing violence to the Scriptures. But having first promulgated false dogmas to men; plainly fighting against almost the whole Scriptures, and constantly confuted by us who contradict them; for the rest, even now partly they hold out against admitting the prophetic Scriptures, and partly disparage us as of a different nature, and incapable of understanding what is peculiar to them. And sometimes even they deny their own dogmas, when these are confuted, being ashamed openly to own what in private they glory in teaching. For this may be seen in all the heresies, when you examine the iniquities of their dogmas. For when they are overturned by our clearly showing that they are opposed to the Scriptures, one of two things may be seen to have been done by those who defend the dogma. For they either despise the consistency of their own dogmas, or despise the prophecy itself, or rather their own hope. And they invariably prefer what seems to them to be more evident to what has been spoken by the Lord through the prophets and by the Gospel, and, besides, attested and confirmed by the apostles.” (Stromata, Book 7, chapter 16)
Scripture alone is not enough, and never has been. That being said, it is God-breathed and “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”. As such, spreading it is a good thing, but it is not the whole of the Gospel.
LikeLike
Haven’t seen anyone mention it here, but the Catholic Church doesn’t actually teach that Peter is the “successor” to Jesus.
LikeLike
>The Holy Bible without proper guidance can be as harmful as giving a 4 year old scissors and tell him to run around in circles as fast as he can.
Reminds me of an email link I got this morning:
http://www.apostoliclive.com/play.php?vid=492
I don’t expect to see this comment posted, but you would find this video hard to believe if not seen with your own eyes. And this is a 3 year old!
LikeLike
Protestants differ with Catholics on Matthew 16:16-18….but the difference should not divide us. My interpretation (paraphrased) is that Jesus is making the crowd aware that Peter is the only one who ‘knows'(knowledge conceived) by divine revelation from the Father that Jesus is the awaited Messiah. For me, Christ is saying, ‘You know me..my love and my grace..personally… and I know you very personally. And on this rock (foundation) I will build my church.’ I have personal visits with Christ in the person of the Holy Comforter. And He calls my by my name, Carolyn, on each encounter. I am blown away that amidst all the people who exist eternally…He knows that I am Carolyn.
LikeLike
>The Holy Bible without proper guidance can be as harmful as giving a 4 year old scissors and tell him to run around in circles as fast as he can.
Thanks for reminding me why I’ll stay right where I am in the body of Christ.
That’s one amazing statement. “Harmful.” Wow.
LikeLike
1. No one is trying to convert anyone here.
2. The expectations are for short posts without argumentative rhetoric.
3. Just for my own clarification, are you a Roman Catholic or something else? I’m very confused? (And, if so, do you accept Vatican II/Benedict 16 as legit?)
LikeLike
As far as the Catholic view on the Bible distribution, yes of course it is part of it however we are against two things.
1. Distributing and incomplete Bibles (New Testament only) or not including the Deuterocanonical books, and of course inacurate translations.
2. The Holy Bible without proper guidance can be as harmful as giving a 4 year old scissors and tell him to run around in circles as fast as he can.
LikeLike
Mr. iMonk I think you might be hijacking your own thread. I would be most happy to participate given the word. However I would like to know if it is ok to do so.
I don’t want to go down a road you never intended if this is not the case.
LikeLike
If I go by the epistles, James isn’t playing any role as the successor to Jesus and the seat of all authority. Which would be exactly what I believe. (But it takes some serious presuppositional reading to make Peter the bottom line in the Jerusalem conference.)
The epistles- Peter’s and Paul’s- read like they are apostles. Which is exactly what I expect. That Paul would never mention the papacy in I Cor or Romans is more than an understandable omission. It’s incomprehensible.
LikeLike
Oh hey, if you go by the Epistles, nobody except Paul (and his companions) was doing anything anywhere.
James and the lads were just sitting on their backsides in Jerusalem doing nuffin’ – at least, nothing that we hear from Paul 🙂
Though that is *not* me saying “The Gospel of Thomas is the real low-down on what the rest of the Twelve were doing while Paul was swanning around glamourously being shipwrecked, imprisoned, beaten, run out of town…” 😉
LikeLike
Regarding the contrast between EWTN and some of the other channels – well, to be fair, we do have our share of the wacky, the kooky, and the down-right frothing at the mouth, except they don’t make television programmes or set up their own tv/radio stations.
Another small mercy to be thankful for.
LikeLike
As I said, Paul never said it. Not in a single pastoral letter. But of course, there’s dozens of good reasons for that. (ahem) He can tell Titus to appoint elders in every city in Crete, and never mention Peter ordaining bishops anywhere, but it’s all saying the same thing. 🙂
LikeLike
“Paul never says “Peter is the infallible successor to Jesus—
Well, of course not, Michael. That’s what Acts is for 😉
LikeLike
On giving away Bibles:
I am sure some of my Catholic friends would agree (hopefully) that evangelicals have a broader vision of scripture distribution than giving Bibles to kids in Catholic education programs.
Scripture distribution is a major evangelical outreach, from the Gideons to the various Bible societies. The distribution of God’s word to the public is a crucial part of why evangelicals are involved in everything from God’s Smugglers to IBS, etc distributing scripture to the military, Wycliffe translators, and on and on.
It’s hard not to make this observation: Is the distribution of the scripture OUTSIDE of the context of the church’s teaching authority something the RCC can fully endorse? Historically, the RCC opposed the translation and distribution of the Bible. Now that the church is more committed to the average Catholic layperson having the Bible and reading it devotionally, how about the next level: scripture evangelism.
This is close to my heart because our ministry gets Bibles to all our international students every year and they are very appreciative.
MS
LikeLike
Lets face it there is deception in both camps and every camp that becomes obcessed with its own particular brand of “strain out the nat and swallow the camel” theology is doomed to futility because ultimately there is no real selfless serving love involved which is the heart of the gospel.
If the Vatican and all the monumental Protestant churchs gave up and sold all their property & goodies and gave them to the poor there would be an outpouring of the spirit like we’ve never seen in history.
So the real question( 4 me anyway )is has the truth set you free personally and can you persuade others to see beyond the gospels of hypocricy?
Free from the religious binds that tie you to a denomination or creed that puts denominational theology before the heart of the gospel which as Christ said is selfless love & mercy.
Sooner or later these structures just as the political structures of today will fall from their own self serving weight and Gods judgement.
As it says in the parable of the servants let the wheat grow with the tares because God will do the seperating come harvest time.
LikeLike
“Not that there’s no truth to what you say, but the fact that a basic nutball like Morris Cerullo has some following within something loosely labeled ‘evangelicalism’ isn’t very good proof of your point that evangelicals have ‘little popes’ and the like.”
True, the existence of Morris Cerullo’s TV show in and of itself does not prove that evangelicalism has its own little popes. However, each evangelical believes his own interpretation of the Bible is correct, and thus he is his own pope. Or perhaps he believes that his pastor’s interpretation of the Bible is correct, then his pastor is his pope. Or maybe he believes that Morris Cerullo interprets the Bible correctly, in which case Morris is his pope.
In any event, every Christian everywhere believes that somebody can interpret the Bible correctly. If he’s Protestant, he usually believes that he is the one who can (or will after more study). If he’s Catholic, he usually believes that the pope is the one who can.
Or we could work on the theory that nobody anywhere can interpret the Bible correctly. If that’s the case there’s no point in bothering to read it at all. Sure, you might stumble on to the correct interpretation, or you might not, but in any even there’s no way to tell. Why bother to try? This is exactly what has happened to many of us. This approach is likely to lead us straight out of Christianity altogether and into… not much.
LikeLike
Morris Cerulo and the other wack jobs on so-called Christian T.V. does not represent confessional protestantism in any of its varieties- Lutheran, Presbyterian, Reformed, etc. Most Confessional Protestants see the high cost of television time as prohibitive and poor stewardship. So TV is left to the hucksters and maybe that is ok. Malcum Muggeridge used to argue that the television medium by nature distorts and lies. I am not an evangelical but I suspect that most evangelicals are no more represented by these hucksters then confessional protestants and mainline protestants. But I must admit I know little of evangelicalism and if you tell me that Creulo and TBN represents the average evangelical I guess I will have to recant. I will be very, very surprized if this tv stuff is what is actually going on in evangelical churches.
LikeLike
Sean:
EWTN is totally supported by contributions,etc. The RC hierarchy doesn’t officially support it and a hefty (although certainly declining) number of bishops don’t like EWTN at all.
You’ll see fundraising on EWTN, true, but it is very low-key. Mother Angelica’s appeal was, famously, something like, “Don’t forget to slip us between the heating and the gas bill.”
LikeLike
*The fact that Cerulo’s Bible has his prophecy notes on each page shows that evangelicals have their little popes and little magisteriums. They just don’t like to admit it.*
iMonk, that’s a bit of a stretch, don’t you think? Not that there’s no truth to what you say, but the fact that a basic nutball like Morris Cerullo has some following within something loosely labeled ‘evangelicalism’ isn’t very good proof of your point that evangelicals have ‘little popes’ and the like. It seems to me that the most you can prove by that fact alone is that there is some segment of professing Christians (many of which probably wouldn’t know an evangelical from an elephant) who mindlessly follow charismatic leaders. That, it would seem, is endemic to most any faith group in the world. I share much of your cynicism about such things, but methinks thou extrapolateth too much…
LikeLike
Michael, I just saw someone in the dark hours of the night peddling holy oil that when rubbed into the skin would cure arthritis, cancer, etc., and that we should “sow into this ministry” so we too could have this miracle.
This and the prosperity message preachers you decry regularly on your blog are merely creatures of market economics in the religious context. The same impulse that makes people buy the latest pill or machine that will make them lose 12 inches in 10 days and keep eating what they want will also make them susceptible to a spiritual sales pitch in which disciplines and growing in Christ-likeness (which is hard and might challenge our lifestyles)can be short-circuited by sending a check for the “miracle cure” of the holy oil, prophetic bible, prayer cloth, etc.
The high-powered cash cows on TBN get to stay on TBN because they are cash cows, and it costs money to be on TV. This is nothing more than a market imperative in which appeals are made to our spiritual dissatisfaction and greed in a way that maximizes donations.
I don’t know exactly how EWTN works, but I imagine it is underwritten by the RCC. If so, during their programs no time need be taken in making an appeal for money. I imagine if Fr. Pascwa had to support his own show, he might have less time to talk about Paul’s letters. But I certainly agree that these underlying realities really make evangelicals look like a foul horde of money-grubbing hucksters in a side-by-side comparison.
LikeLike
I’m not sure if anyone caught this yet but Morris Cerulo isn’t giving away bibles – he’s selling them $240.00. Which, for me, is despicable since each of them probably costs a little less than $20 to make. Who knows? Maybe this is the tv preacher version of an indulgence?
A.T.
LikeLike
Let me take small issue with this:
“Paul never says “Peter is the infallible successor to Jesus†anywhere and you’ll find out how far Paul’s epistles actually go.”
Paul, by his own word, was the least of the Apostles. Why should I look to him over the Gospels? The Epistles are great supporting documents for the Gospels, but they are inherantly secondary and dependent documents. Jesus established the Church directly when He renames Simon Bar-Jonah Peter as sign of Peter’s new mission. Whatever Paul might say is only commentary by comparison. Why should the Epistles go farther than the Gospels? Go ahead and reject the Catholic claim if you must, but Paul is not the be all and end all authority.
LikeLike
Oh… my :head downward from a heavy heart:… I am a life-long Baptist/Methodist blend because of the family I was born into. I often watch EWTN and have never seen a program I didn’t benefit from in some way. I find it enlightening. I also have benefited from all the television ministries mentioned by all the commentators. I have never been to a church I did not like…no matter the denomination. I find God in every place where I seek Him. We are BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN CHRIST! He loves us with the same love and He shows us the same mercies…no matter what our religious affiliations. The truth of God is multifaceted. No one denomination has greater ‘revelation’ than another. ‘We are lively stones..fitly joined together’ as the Temple or Church of the Living God. If we are indeed one of the lively stones joined to make the Church…Love will dwell within. When the love of God indwells our fleshly ‘temple,’ we see with the eyes of love. Love is kind. Love sees the good and the benefit. Love does not condemn. Truth is spiritually discerned and experienced according to how God chooses to endow each individual to accomplish his/her destiny in God. I fear there is great danger in doing or saying anything that would bring harm to the ministry of any person who says he/she is called of God.
LikeLike
Oh and something that might blow your minds the Church gives Plenary Indulgences for reading the Holy Scriptures for more than a half hour a day.
That is of course to all Christians, so to those Protestants that read their Bibles all the time, just something you might want to keep in mind next time you start doing some Bible reading. 😉
LikeLike
Catholics have always read the Holy Scriptures the Church knows however that reading the Holy book without knowing what it represents and in what context it should be read can lead to heretical thought.
I find it funny that some of you think that once a Catholic reads the Holy Bible the “scales” will fall from their eyes and become Evangelicals. As a matter of fact when I first began to read the Holy Bible which was around the time I decided to look in to Christianity seriously. I thought from the very first glance that the Catholic position was firmly stablished in scripture. I guess you could say that it was the Holy Scriptures that convinced me that the Church is what it claims to be.
Look I don’t mean to give you my statement of faith. I just want to make it clear that reading the Holy Bible is not the eye opening experience that you would believe it to be for Catholics, at least not in the sence you would prefer it to be.
LikeLike
Imonk, the irony I see in your TV viewing experience is this: it appears to be some sort of “reverse reformation.” There’s a Protestant “selling” maybe not spiritual favors, but some sort of promise of blessing. And then there’s a Catholic urging viewers to study scripture, the word of God. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
LikeLike
We have one very close to us who left the Baptist church to become Catholic. The first thing they did in RCI (Is this the correct term?) was to give everyone a Bible. We attended the confirmation service at the invitation of this person. The priest leading it was a pretty hefty guy. This church had about 700 people in it, all ages. I would guess 60 or so were being confirmed as Catholics. He stepped down to the front pew, put one foot on the pew and leaned over toward those being confirmed and said, “You have taken vows of confirmation to Christ and His Church. But if you do not mean it in your heart, the words are worthless.” Hmmmm…the vows and these words sounded like words I have heard in evangelistic meetings. Very similar.
I have another friend who knows and has worked with Morris Cerullo. I do not know Cerullo nor do I watch much of what is called Christian television. My television is not Christian. In fact, at times I think it demon possessed and may very well go to perdition. 🙂
My friend reported (in all seriousness and with tears) that Cerullo told him of an open-air healing crusade in Africa where they “stacked wheel chairs six stories high.” I don’t know about you, but I would pay money to see an old guy heave a wheelchair 60+ feet high in the air! 🙂
LikeLike
anecdotally …
My wife (Baptist) teaches at a RC High School.
All teachers are required to undergo religious training (she got her own Catechism of the RC Church, which makes for interesting reading)
Her observations from the training….
She was certainly the most willing to participate in the discussion (which may be a personality issue, but I think it is more from the perspective that the RC are trained that only the priesthood has the authority to interpret scripture)
In discussions over breaks and lunch, it was clear to her that she was much more familiar with the bible than other class members.
That on most of the issues, there was very little difference from her beliefs and what was taught in the classes
That among the teachers, she teaches scripture memorization in her class (not a religion class) more than any other of the teachers. In fact, some of the teachers think that she is odd for using scripture (again, I think going back to who has the authority to actually teach)
As a general rule, I enjoy being with her co-workers at the RC High School a lot more than I enjoyed being with her co workers at a “Christian” school.
LikeLike
” … Morris Cerulo saying that he has 1100 Prophecy Bibles only for his partners who will sow $240 into his ministry.”
Hmmm … could Cerulo be prophesying that only 1100 partners would want his “special” Bible? 1100, 1100 – must have a special “end time” meaning – must look that up …
LikeLike
Do Catholics ever just give the Bible to people and say “Read it and see what God says to you in it?â€
First yes, Catholics actually give away bibles, at least in my parish. They give them to the children in the parish school, they give them to RCIA canidates, they catechisms to folks who are participating in the faith formation that just started for adults as well as the weekly CCD classes for the Catholic kids attending our public school.
My priest encouraged lectino divina in his homily yesterday, I’d say it is an equivalent to evangelical devotions, reading a verse or two and mediating on it in prayer. He then stated “See what God speaks to you”; more personally directed rather than make up your own doctinal confession from your reading.
I’m particularly curious of what folks think of the Bible reading marathon that the pope, cardinals, bishops are participating in at the bishops’ synod on the Scripture.
The ENTIRETY of SCRIPTURE read aloud publically by the leaders of our Catholic tradition broadcast and made available the ENTIRE world, what do you think?
…and please be gracious, don’t anyone toss out a tort about Balaam’s donkey…
Best,
Jenny
LikeLike
Lord have mercy. There are definitely a fair share of kooky Catholics, as some have pointed out already. Fr. Mitch seems pretty sharp. I don’t have EWTN right now on our cable package (which, for me, right now, is probably good) – but he’s a good one.
On the Scripture thing, the old Jesuit Priest (87) whom I call my spiritual director, and whom I do not see near enough, led Fr. Mitch’s ordination retreat. Every time I’ve ever had a session with him, Scriptures flow out of the man like water from a living well. If I confess to him, my “penance” is usually something like (pulls some Scripture out of his deep reservoir) “take this and meditate on it for a while.”
And as I remember it, when I came into the Church at 13 (in 1980), one of the first gifts I was given was a Bible, by an older woman in our parish who sort of took me under her wing. I still have that old Bible.
LikeLike
I also stumbled upon Cerullo and if I remember correctly he said God TOLD him to give away 1179? of those Bibles for free (usually you’d have to shell out the $240 bucks, he said)! And of course, they’re not normally available to the general public, only those Cerullo deems worthy of receiving his “anointed” Bible.
I’ll leave the Catholic stuff alone…
LikeLike
To say that Cerulo is “giving away Bibles” is, perhaps overly-gracious. Not criticizing you, just observing. 😉
LikeLike
I think I agree with aialsmoi:
“on 12 Oct 2008 at 2:44 pm aliasmoi
*sigh*”
Morris Cerulo and his ilk makes me sick.
Does any sane person with any degree of intelligence above idiot not see these con men for what they are?
I’m not Catholic but the degree and depth of hubris and outright lying for one’s own benefit astounds me.
I am always amused at ex-Catholic comeidans and writers who thrash in their guilt and the suppposed chicanery of thier clergy.
Try being a Baptist or a pentecostal.
LikeLike
I like Father Pacwa because he always wears cowboy boots. That makes him cool in my book.
LikeLike
I’ve said to people that the best tool the RCC has to win me over to their side of the Tiber is not EWTN. It is all the other “Christian” channels around it. If those were all I know of Protestantism, I would definitely go to the other side.
LikeLike
I agree with Martha. As someone once said, Catholicism is a much bigger tent from the inside than from the outside. There are people with a profound devotion to Mary and/or the saints, and there are those more focused on Jesus and our Lord. There are charismatics, and there are people who long for Latin mass in the old rite. There are people who read the Bible, and those who only read or listen what’s in the Sunday liturgy. The list goes on and on.
For me, as a Catholic with a deep respect for other Christian churches, what bothers me the most is the vast number of nominal Catholics — and I don’t mean those who disagree with this or that Church doctrine, but those who follow the rituals but don’t even attempt to live the faith. This, and the general impression that Christian live is a burden, has prompted me several times to question if I should leave Rome and join people who really seem to enjoy being Christians and try to follow Christ. However, I feel it would be an error to leave a Church whose official teachings are sound and ground both in the Bible and in Church History for another Church (where would I go, anyway?)
LikeLike
Martha,
As one who crossed the Tiber, I agree with your observations. They match up nicely with mine.
Mike (the 9:07pm comment) I do agree with you about our preaching. But then, I’ve suffered through a lot of very bad Baptist preaching too. For example, we had a pastor who always went 1 story too long and thereby ruined his point. Then, on Youth Sunday, his son was the youth preacher that day, and did the same thing. ARG
LikeLike
It can be a mixed bag. The Catholic church could learn ALOT about preaching from our prot brothers. Example.. today the Gospel reading was Matt 22:1-4 and we got a sermon about stewardship.
I love our priest but what missed opportunity to teach!
LikeLike
“I have a question: is there as much variety within the catholic church as there is within “evangelicalism—
Good question, Mike. A short answer would be “That depends on what you consider ‘variety’.” There are certainly those who are More Catholic Than The Pope (and think that our current fella is falling down on the job something shocking since there haven’t been excommunications and anathemas flung around like snuff at a wake, never mind the wishy-washiness about bringing back the rack and the thumbscrews); those who (God love them) spend a great deal of their time promoting various Marian apparitions of varying degrees of obscurity with urgent messages for repentance and prayer before God chastises a disobedient world; those who just slob along (the great majority of us, myself included); those who pick and choose what they want to believe (the infamous ‘cafeteria Catholics’); those who are convinced that, any day now, just as soon as the next Pope gets elected, there will be all the modernisations they’ve been waiting for with their tongues hanging out (generally, these people have been saying “Just wait for the next Pope!” since, oh, Paul VI).
And of course, on the extreme of the most extreme fringe (at one end), the Sedevacantists (to boil it down: no valid Pope since – well, depends; Pius X? Earlier? Later? Certainly John XXIII was very suspect, and everyone since is NOT the REAL Pope!) and on the other extreme of the most extreme fringe, those who feel that the Spirit of Vatican II has been betrayed and suppressed, and that the Revolution is about forty years overdue.
Generally, in Catholicism, if someone is struck with a new light on the Gospel, he or she goes off and founds a religious order (Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, Sisters of Mercy, Poor Clares, etc. etc. etc.) rather than lighting out and setting up his or her own separate church as in Evangelicalism – or at least, that’s how it looks to this outsider 🙂
LikeLike
Maybe after all the Catholics read the Epistles they will convert to Evangelicalism… that would be awesome. I love this Pope!
LikeLike
As for Catholics reading the bible, right now the Vatican is holding a televised bible-reading marathon, reading the Italian-language bible from Genesis to Revelation. Pope Benedict was the first reader.
But as for TV preachers trying to get money: I have yet to watch one that doesn’t, in one way or another, suggest you should send ’em some. Some are less scam-artist-y than others; some do nothing more than point out that they are funded by donations, which is meant to lead people to think, “Hey, they’re funded by donations; I could send them a donation.” Not that there’s anything wrong with telling folks you need funding, but selling them $240 tax-deductible bibles doesn’t necessarily sound like you’re seeking the Kingdom of God first.
LikeLike
Kevin D., the difference is that the Catholic church always solicits money from you with a practical rationale, instead of a spiritual one, i.e. “help The Sisters of The Grotto of The Enthusiastic Apoplexy put a well next to our orphanage for terminally-ill children in Beirut (so that Catholicism won’t die and the world won’t end)”, instead of “GOD wants you to buy this special Bible, and the WORD of GOD never comes back void, so OPEN your HEART to GOD”, etc.
I’m not saying that Catholics aren’t ever guilty of being excessive (we are – my dad gets at least 4 different letters a day from Catholic groups who want money), but I’ve never heard of a Catholic priest ever actually questioning anyone’s salvation over their reluctance to donate to their pet charity, let alone to the latest ‘annointed’ book fad or morality crusade.
LikeLike
Umm…that should have been “in front of a crucifx OR the Blessed Virgin.” Ah…sorry. That wasn’t a good picture.
LikeLike
Michael, I’m sure Kevin D. Johnson is right to some degree. Every group has their extremists who have “jumped the track.”
But, on any given Sunday morning as I am preparing to leave to attend my own congregation I flip through the “religous” channels looking for something decent to watch. After I’ve gone through Creflo Dollar, Paula White, Kenneth Copeland, John Hagee, and Rod Parsley I just about give up. The best I’ve seen is James Merrit, Jantzen Franklin, and Charles Stanley. But usually these guys are preaching on some kind of “principle” for a better life, marriage, etc.
And then I happen across EWTN and what do I see? A guy who is all dressed up in his robes and such or some guy with a collar standing in front of a crucifix of the “Blessed Virgin” and preaching.
And what do I hear? A challenge to be holy, humble, servant-minded, reverent, etc. The focus is on God and Christ and his work on our behalf. I’m not kidding (I know what the TR’s are thinking).
I’ve asked my wife on many occassions, “Why do the evangelicals preach about us while the Catholics are preaching about Jesus?” Honestly I’d rather listen to Father John Corapi for an hour over any of those mentioned above, even if I have to pick out some of the bones for the meat.
I don’t think your post is an exaggeration in the least.
LikeLike
JCL – If you haven’t met Catholics who read the Bible, or heard Priests, Popes and Prominent Catholic speakers encourage Catholics to read the Bible, you just haven’t been paying attention. As a cradle Catholic (barely over 40 yrs. old) I can tell you I have been encouraged to read the Bible my whole life, and have generally followed the advice. I am personally doing a pretty thorough personal study of the Pauline Epistles, as Pope Benedict XVI has suggested for this year of Paul. BTW, at the Synod on Scripture, currently underway, they are reading the ENTIRE BIBLE, LIVE ONLINE. Those crazy Catholics.
Of course, you would be correct to notice, that in general Catholics don’t spend much (enough) time reading scripture privately.
Today, I saw a man carrying a Bible into my Catholic Church for Mass, and I said to my wife – “that must be a protestant visitor!”
God Bless
Paul in the GNW
LikeLike
As a casual observer of “prosperity theology”, I usually recommend that people turn off the television and turn to scripture. I also recommend books like “The Politics of Jesus” by Yoder and “The New Monasticism” by Wilson-Hartgrove.
LikeLike
Working at a Catholic school, I see some good things:
-a campus ministry office that serves students across the political spectrum and sees all of them as real Christians.
-Church leadership that resists public opinion and encourages scholarship, free-thinking and debate
-Church leadership that takes stands on issues that are often not popular.
The homilies I’ve heard do focus pretty consistently on Jesus and Biblical exposition, too. There are negatives as well, of course.
LikeLike
Wow! What a great offer!
For only two hundred and forty of your American dollars, I could get my hands on a special Prophecy Bible (which must be waaay better than a common-or-garden Bible), in order to saturate myself in the Epistles as instructed by the Pope!
Combine this special unique Prophecy Bible with the Plenary Indulgence for the Pauline Year, and it’s a win-win situation, Michael 😉
LikeLike
I have a question: is there as much variety within the catholic church as there is within “evangelicalism” (assuming you can call a TV preacher running a con an evangelical)? It seems like comparing evangelicals to catholics is kinda like comparing people from Rhode Island with people from Asia (in terms of variety, not in terms of population). Could someone who is more in tune with current catholicism than I am help me out?
LikeLike
Fr. Pacwa is a cradle Catholic, and of Polish ancestry to boot. His academic training has specialized in biblical studies and biblical languages.
LikeLike
If we can all keep calm here, I’ll show my cards to say there’s more to this one on a couple of levels than first reading shows.
It says what it says, and it’s what happens. But there’s other things to see and say. Just try to say them with some maturity and kindness, OK?
LikeLike
Oh please. I get an email at least once a week from Karl Keating and the Catholic Answers crowd begging for money to avert some sort of pending nuclear size disaster that threatens all that is supposedly whole and sacred…’Help us stave the tide of XYZ by contributing your thousands or the world is coming to an end and there will be no more Catholic Church’.
Every communion has their wackos – and there ought not be differences between evangelicals and Catholics on at least one score – everyone should bow their knee to our Lord and follow Him each where the Lord has put them.
Oh. And maybe we ought to think about just turning the TV off…
LikeLike
Sad but true.
“Why don’t we have anyone like Father Mitch in the protestant church?”
We do. They’re just not on “Prosperity”-owned TBN…or not very often.
I also wonder if the Protestant tendancy to attack anyone who’s doctrine is not 100% like ours may have something to do with that.
DD
LikeLike
If I ever decided to convert to catholicism, Father Mitch would be right up there with Scott Hahn for influences in that direction… Why don’t we have anyone like Father Mitch in the protestant church?
LikeLike
JCL: The Catholic I am married to reads the Bible pretty much all day long.
The pope has declared it the year of Paul and called upon all Catholics to read all Paul’s letters.
LikeLike
Only study on Revelation that didn’t degenerate into a “SIX SIXTY SIX! DON’T TAKE THE MARK!” conspiracy scare job was the one taught by a Jesuit.
And then there was the one on First & Second Kings on EWTN many-many years ago where the Jesuit teaching it went through the list of the Northern Kingdom kings overthrown by their successors and commented “It’s a Banana Republic!”
LikeLike
Fr. Pascwa must be a rare bird. (A convert from protestantism?)I’ve never met a catholic who was a serious Bible reader.
LikeLike
*sigh*
LikeLike