Pope advocates directly disobedience to Jesus

[dad]

I don't know what mob preaching is or where you go that. I simply brought up the idea of a mob as a predictable result of a rally type evangelism in a Muslim majority nation.

Irrelevant. The way preaching is done there has nothing to do with that.

radio programming is not unsolicited, no one is forced to listen to it.

No one is forced, one hopes to listen to the gospel either. None of this justifies a Vatican call to avoid preaching the gospel in a way that involves actually talking and teaching it.

 

[Philip_B]

The reason they call it witness is because people see what we do and measure it against the standards we proclaim, and when we measure up, there is the ground for authentic evangelism.

Proselytisation as such does not respect the other person, who like us bears the image and the likeness of God who called us both into being. I get what the Pope is on about, and I am not in communion with the see of Peter, but I do think that Francis is an authentic witness to the Gospel, and many non believers recognise that in his as well.

 

[dad]

The reason they call it witness is because people see what we do and measure it against the standards we proclaim, and when we measure up, there is the ground for authentic evangelism.

Sounds like you at least think there is some proclaiming somewhere in there.

Proselytisation as such does not respect the other person, who like us bears the image and the likeness of God who called us both into being.

How about Philip preaching on the highway to the stranger, did he respect the person? How about Paul preaching in prison? Did he measure up to Anglican standards as a jailbird? How about Peter that day he got 5000 converts, did he respect them and all their differences? How in the world can anyone claim that preaching the good news to people that Jesus came and died for them and paid the price for all our sins NOT be respecting people? Some people seem to think the only way to respect people is to worship false gods with them, or respect their false belief system etc.

I get what the Pope is on about, and I am not in communion with the see of Peter, but I do think that Francis is an authentic witness to the Gospel, and many non believers recognise that in his as well.

The issue is his advice to people to not preach the gospel and try to get people saved. Running some silent religious act and claiming that this is the extent to what preaching the gospel is all about may seem authentic to you. It opposes Jesus though.

 

[DamianWarS]

No one is forced, one hopes to listen to the gospel either. None of this justifies a Vatican call to avoid preaching the gospel in a way that involves actually talking and teaching it.

I think you misunderstand me, I'm saying we need to demonstrate the gospel in ways it's received not in ways that are unwanted. this takes an intimate understanding of our mission to know what they want and what they don't want.

 

[Philip_B]

Sounds like you at least think there is some proclaiming somewhere in there.

How about Philip preaching on the highway to the stranger, did he respect the person? How about Paul preaching in prison? Did he measure up to Anglican standards as a jailbird? How about Peter that day he got 5000 converts, did he respect them and all their differences? How in the world can anyone claim that preaching the good news to people that Jesus came and died for them and paid the price for all our sins NOT be respecting people? Some people seem to think the only way to respect people is to worship false gods with them, or respect their false belief system etc.

The issue is his advice to people to not preach the gospel and try to get people saved. Running some silent religious act and claiming that this is the extent to what preaching the gospel is all about may seem authentic to you. It opposes Jesus though.

• How about Philip preaching on the highway to the stranger, did he respect the person? Yes.
• How about Paul preaching in prison? Yes.
• Did he measure up to Anglican standards as a jailbird? Yes. (though what Anglican stands have to do with the matter at puzzles me)
• How about Peter that day he got 5000 converts, did he respect them and all their differences? Yes.
• How in the world can anyone claim that preaching the good news to people that Jesus came and died for them and paid the price for all our sins NOT be respecting people? Quite easily if you look at the way some people go about it.
• Some people seem to think the only way to respect people is to worship false gods with them, or respect their false belief system etc. I do not share that view. Respect involves mutuality. I have no expectation of any more respect than I am prepared to give others.

Somewhere back in the depths of this thread I suggested that the faith was caught more often than it was taught.

 

[worshipjunkie]

The reason they call it witness is because people see what we do and measure it against the standards we proclaim, and when we measure up, there is the ground for authentic evangelism.

Show me where in Scripture it says only saintly people can evangelize. No one measures up to the standards they proclaim; we all fall short.

Proselytisation as such does not respect the other person, who like us bears the image and the likeness of God who called us both into being.

And because the other person bears the image and likeness of God, the only thing that DOES respect the other person is one of evangelism/proselytization, aka sharing the Gospel with people so that they may repent of their sins, turn to Jesus and not go to hell. Not out of arrogance, not out of anything but a love for our Savior and a love for the other person. Not wanting them to convert, not sharing the truth- THAT shows a lack of respect for the other person.

 

[dad]

I think you misunderstand me, I'm saying we need to demonstrate the gospel in ways it's received not in ways that are unwanted. this takes an intimate understanding of our mission to know what they want and what they don't want.

I agree. But remember, along with any demo comes the actual gospel. Preaching the gospel is not a silent act. Nor is it a charade of 'guess that word and buy a vowel'. Scripture was not written in invisible ink, and meant only to be decoded by silent actors doing supposed saintly works. His word was meant to be easy to understand so that even a child can understand the message of Jesus. It was meant to be read. Preached. Told. Spoken. It was not some coded message that only folks following silent monks around could clue into maybe.

 

[dad]

• How in the world can anyone claim that preaching the good news to people that Jesus came and died for them and paid the price for all our sins NOT be respecting people? Quite easily if you look at the way some people go about it.

Wrong, if you are talking about all methods that involve actually communicating with words the message of Jesus. It disrespects people to feed their body but starve their souls. But I think you are saying that along with the works we may do, actually preaching the gospel does involve actual spoken/written words? The issue in the thread here, is that apparently the pope recommends not preaching with actual verbal/written communication to the people.

Somewhere back in the depths of this thread I suggested that the faith was caught more often than it was taught.

Catching the 'disease' of eternal salvation through Christ involves more than breathing air, or sharing a coffee cup. It involves coming to know the savior and how He lived and died for us, and that we need to ask for it.

Ro 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

 

[Philip_B]

Wrong, if you are talking about all methods that involve actually communicating with words the message of Jesus. It disrespects people to feed their body but starve their souls. But I think you are saying that along with the works we may do, actually preaching the gospel does involve actual spoken/written words? The issue in the thread here, is that apparently the pope recommends not preaching with actual verbal/written communication to the people.

Catching the 'disease' of eternal salvation through Christ involves more than breathing air, or sharing a coffee cup. It involves coming to know the savior and how He lived and died for us, and that we need to ask for it.

Ro 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Maybe Paul is demonstrative!

Acts 17:22-28
Then Paul stood in front of the Areopagus and said, ‘Athenians, I see how extremely religious you are in every way. For as I went through the city and looked carefully at the objects of your worship, I found among them an altar with the inscription, “To an unknown god.” What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, he who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by human hands, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mortals life and breath and all things. From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him—though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For “In him we live and move and have our being”; as even some of your own poets have said,
“For we too are his offspring.”​

Interestingly Paul did not begin with the word 'Wrong'.

Rule of 1221, Chapter XII (Francis of Assisi)
No brother should preach contrary to the form and regulations of the holy Church nor unless he has been permitted by his minister … All the Friars … should preach by their deeds.​

We live in a world of many empty noises, from clearly overglossed claims for one product or another, the clearly overstated claims of politicians seeking election, and whoever that is calling on my landline at the moment that I will not answer.

If the Gospel is to be heard, it will start with our actions and our attitudes, and then when we do speak, our words will have meaning and weight. Again and again we see in the Gospel that Jesus responds to people.

So, with respect, I am not going to accept your 'wrong' on this occasion.

 

[dad]

Interestingly Paul did not begin with the word 'Wrong'.

True, nor did he start those particular sentences with the word right. Or with the word peanut butter.

Rule of 1221, Chapter XII (Francis of Assisi)
No brother should preach contrary to the form and regulations of the holy Church nor unless he has been permitted by his minister … All the Friars … should preach by their deeds.​

Well, I don't mind all the friars who haven't been fired or arrested for sexual abuse preaching by their deeds. Perhaps other monks or nuns or something in their convent might pick up on some message. Nothing to do with preaching the gospel to all the world though, of course.

We live in a world of many empty noises, from clearly overglossed claims for one product or another, the clearly overstated claims of politicians seeking election, and whoever that is calling on my landline at the moment that I will not answer.

Or whoever you may call that doesn't want to answer..etc. Nothing to do with the topic.

If the Gospel is to be heard, it will start with our actions and our attitudes, and then when we do speak, our words will have meaning and weight. Again and again we see in the Gospel that Jesus responds to people.

Who says? You wrote that rule. If the gospel is to be heard, someone needs to be proclaiming it. No one will hear it watching you dunk doughnuts in a coffee.

So, with respect, I am not going to accept your 'wrong' on this occasion.

The command to preach the gospel fortunately does not depend on you agreeing or giving the nod.

 

[Philip_B]

True, nor did he start those particular sentences with the word right. Or with the word peanut butter.

Well, I don't mind all the friars who haven't been fired or arrested for sexual abuse preaching by their deeds. Perhaps other monks or nuns or something in their convent might pick up on some message. Nothing to do with preaching the gospel to all the world though, of course.

Or whoever you may call that doesn't want to answer..etc. Nothing to do with the topic.
Who says? You wrote that rule. If the gospel is to be heard, someone needs to be proclaiming it. No one will hear it watching you dunk doughnuts in a coffee.
The command to preach the gospel fortunately does not depend on you agreeing or giving the nod.

I see no point in discussing the matter with you. You have either missed the point I was making, or were simply prepared to deliberately misconstrue what I was saying. Unfortunately this sheds light for neither of us, nor anyone else who may read it. Accordingly, I bid you good day sir. May a blessing be upon your house.

 

[dad]

I see no point in discussing the matter with you. You have either missed the point I was making, or were simply prepared to deliberately misconstrue what I was saying. Unfortunately this sheds light for neither of us, nor anyone else who may read it. Accordingly, I bid you good day sir. May a blessing be upon your house.

Thanks. I prefer to discuss the topic anyhow.