Nor does your cruelty, however exquisite, avail you; it is rather a temptation to us. The oftener we are mown down by you, the more in number we grow; the blood of Christians is seed. Tertullian
A group of people who likely couldn't care less what Fr. Eberhard Schokenhoff says. Nor, I dare say, have they read the blogs and comment boxes of folks typing their opinions from the safety of their apartments and basements. These people risk everything for their faith. We in North America risk nothing. You wonder why the faith is flourishing in the third world and dying in our own back yards? These people confront a persecution that wields real swords. We largely content ourselves with setting up straw men and delight in knocking them down. We occupy ourselves with issues and politics and ignore the weightier matters of proclaiming the kingdom and the salvation of souls.
You want to know a real bit of irony in all this? These men are members of the Coptic Church which dissented from the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Yes, they are technically schismatic and monophysites. Do you somehow imagine that Our Lord will not welcome these martyrs, who died with His name on their lips, into the kingdom with open arms? How do you suppose he will greet you and I?
Anybody remember the churches of Asia Minor mentioned in the book of Revelation? I would be hard pressed to name the entire list. They are gone and forgotten. It might not be a bad idea to read Revelation to find out just what might cause a church to disappear.
4 comments:
Actually it is nor an either or problem. The catastrophe in the Middle East is due heavily to spiritual ideas gone wrong. The rampant heresy in the West; its decadence, is feeding the various "scourges" sent by God. Certainly, there will be many who will sit in their armchairs.... but this does not preclude identifying heresy, and trying to live a decent Christina life where one is. Both problems: ideologically driven violence and heresy spread death.
Does evangelism enter into this at all? You have not answered my earlier question. "How exactly do you propose to enter into a conversation with someone who is likely to react with offense to anything you have to say?... How exactly do you propose to speak to homosexuals?" If you do not attempt to answer this question then you have a problem. Much of what you call heresy here is wrong headed attempts to deal with this question. You should at least point readers in the direction of orthodox ways of dealing with it. Otherwise you are little more than a booming gong or a clashing cymbal.
I think I told you that Pope Benedict pointed out the way to young people on a number of occasions. This, while you too were struggling to discern conveying truth to someone who does not believe in truth. If people read the blog, they would know that "orthodox ways of dealing with it" have been pointed out on numerous occasions.e.g. Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict and Pope Francis (the preaching of a sexual ethic, the crisis of faith and moral relativism and the dangers of gender ideology, respectively). The problem is that if the person involved rejects a priori truth, the only option is to "preach" through good living. I would presume that Christians during Roman times just lived their lives as Christians...
Wrong answer. The question is not posed to the last three popes but to you. Evangelism is a personal responsibility and it involves entering into a conversation with someone. I have been reading on the new evangelization and I may yet end up in Pope Francis last encyclical. At the moment I am talking to you. Your record in dealing with Mary Wagner and Linda Gibbons situation was exemplary because not only did you write on the subject but you were personally involved. I repeat my question.
Post a Comment