Concerning Lay Preaching and Such
#31
(12-26-2009, 07:45 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote:
(12-26-2009, 12:54 PM)ServantofMary Wrote:
(12-26-2009, 12:34 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Servant of Mary, what about the "call-in radio show" format where informal debating/disputing occurs? Do you think those apologists should just have a show presenting the Catholic truth, but no phone calls? "Questions & Answers" is what CA is all about!

Hey Lisa! Well, after seeing this Church decree and the reasons behind it, I think there is a lot of wisdom in lay people not participating in public debates and disputes.  A call-in Catholic radio show can easily have a rule that they are not there to debate, but to simply answer questions about the Catholic Faith.  I would listen to it!  :)

Did G.K. Chesterton only write books and newspaper articles or did he not also engage in public debate? I'm asking.

- Lisa

Yes, he debated publicly. I'm not aware that he debated publicly with Protestants, but he could've.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#32
(12-26-2009, 07:45 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Did G.K. Chesterton only write books and newspaper articles or did he not also engage in public debate? I'm asking.

According to Wikipedia, "Chesterton loved to debate, often engaging in friendly public disputes with such men as George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and Clarence Darrow."  But it doesn't say whether these were theological debates, or debates on other issues.
Reply
#33
(12-27-2009, 09:05 AM)ServantofMary Wrote:
(12-26-2009, 07:45 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Did G.K. Chesterton only write books and newspaper articles or did he not also engage in public debate? I'm asking.

According to Wikipedia, "Chesterton loved to debate, often engaging in friendly public disputes with such men as George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and Clarence Darrow."  But it doesn't say whether these were theological debates, or debates on other issues.

I've heard some of them where the Church and the existence of God are both discussed.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#34
I heard the canon against debating went out when the 1917 code came in.  That's the latest result of my research, but it's just hearsay.  Can someone confirm it?
Reply
#35
(12-27-2009, 05:30 PM)SaintGeorge Wrote: I heard the canon against debating went out when the 1917 code came in.  That's the latest result of my research, but it's just hearsay.  Can someone confirm it?

Unfortunately, there is no online version of the 1917 Code in English.. It is only available in Latin.

To get it in English you have to buy the book by Dr. Peters - google Amazon if you're interested. His translation was the first one in English and is the only one that I'm aware of, after doing research on the Internet.

Thing is, "public debating" might not be mentioned in the 1917 Code at all and maybe that's why people assume it "went out." Just like head coverings in the 1983 Code.

- Lisa
Reply
#36
(12-27-2009, 03:17 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: But here's my defense.  This is why I don't blog and post what I think on a forum instead.  People can call me on my opinion, and offer correction and other points of view.  I'm not speaking from a virtual "pulpit".  I mean, sure, it's tempting to spew my thoughts from a blog because I like hearing myself talk, but that gets too close to preaching for me to feel comfortable.  Here, it is more discussion and there are safety mechanisms because there are lots of smart people here to catch and question either other.

When someone goes out and says "This is what the Catholic Church teaches" and does so repeatedly, and not just by reference to materials, but by presenting their opinions and conclusions as Church teaching and Church opinion from a virtual pulpit, that's when it gets sticky.

I hear ya! I would never have a blog and really I don't read them much (except maybe Fr. Z's and those by priests, deacons, and priestly societies, etc). Even there I proceed with caution. Blogs provide a "pulpit" for every wanna-be priest/pope/theologian out there, and I just bet if Pope Alexander were alive today he'd be shaking his finger at them all LOL. When we speak for the Church we've got to be careful. I just heard Fr. Benedict Groeschel come on the radio last night with an apology and a correction on something he said on his show a few weeks ago. So even priests can get it wrong.. but they are accountable for their words, and to authority, and are supposed to publicly undo the wrong they've done. Fr. Groeschel did. We laymen don't always admit we are wrong in blogs and public discussion boards. Sticky indeed.

- Lisa
Reply
#37
(12-27-2009, 06:27 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote:
(12-27-2009, 03:17 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: But here's my defense.  This is why I don't blog and post what I think on a forum instead.  People can call me on my opinion, and offer correction and other points of view.  I'm not speaking from a virtual "pulpit".  I mean, sure, it's tempting to spew my thoughts from a blog because I like hearing myself talk, but that gets too close to preaching for me to feel comfortable.  Here, it is more discussion and there are safety mechanisms because there are lots of smart people here to catch and question either other.

When someone goes out and says "This is what the Catholic Church teaches" and does so repeatedly, and not just by reference to materials, but by presenting their opinions and conclusions as Church teaching and Church opinion from a virtual pulpit, that's when it gets sticky.

I hear ya! I would never have a blog and really I don't read them much (except maybe Fr. Z's and those by priests, deacons, and priestly societies, etc). Even there I proceed with caution. Blogs provide a "pulpit" for every wanna-be priest/pope/theologian out there, and I just bet if Pope Alexander were alive today he'd be shaking his finger at them all LOL. When we speak for the Church we've got to be careful. I just heard Fr. Benedict Groeschel come on the radio last night with an apology and a correction on something he said on his show a few weeks ago. So even priests can get it wrong.. but they are accountable for their words, and to authority, and are supposed to publicly undo the wrong they've done. Fr. Groeschel did. We laymen don't always admit we are wrong in blogs and public discussion boards. Sticky indeed.

- Lisa
I think that a definite distinction can be made between a Catholic speaking about the Faith and a Catholic speaking for the Church. There's a world of difference. And anyone who takes things from the internet forums at face value isn't very sagacious in their discernment of things.  :laughing: To say the least.

Fr. Groeschel is far too guilty of relativism when it comes to world religions. And he really, really gets under my skin when he goes on about the Jews and the Protestants and the Hindus and Muslims all being good people of faith, blah, blah, blah. Did he apologize for that?!?!?

For the most part I find blogs to be a little boring. I much prefer the interaction you get at a forum.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#38
I'm glad someone else said it, I think the laity have done a better job keeping and expounding the faith then the wolves in shepards clothing we have now, Groeshels a perfect example, in fact the entire Ewtn netwrk should be officially supressed as a danger to the faith. I personally have seen more offensive material there then anything in FE
IMO IMO IMO
just because a mouse lives in a cookie jar it doesn't make him a cookie.
Groshel wears a monks habit it doesn't make him St Francis or Benedict, or Benard.
Reply
#39
(12-28-2009, 07:58 AM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: I'm glad someone else said it, I think the laity have done a better job keeping and expounding the faith then the wolves in shepards clothing we have now, Groeshels a perfect example, in fact the entire Ewtn netwrk should be officially supressed as a danger to the faith. I personally have seen more offensive material there then anything in FE
IMO IMO IMO
just because a mouse lives in a cookie jar it doesn't make him a cookie.
Groshel wears a monks habit it doesn't make him St Francis or Benedict, or Benard.

Well, there are problems with the network but it's more complicated than just that. There are good things coming out of EWTN, good programs, plus it exposes people to a more reverent NO Mass to the point where they begin to ask, "What's wrong at my parish?" And I think it's a bridge for people wanting to find their way in traditional Catholicism. It was for me, anyway--that and the internet.

In addition, I don't find ETWN to be anti-traditional. I think they're exploring tradition. I've seen TLM's said there in the church Mother Angelica built.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#40
Luther could have say this below. What is your decisive principle for the truth?

(12-28-2009, 07:58 AM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: I'm glad someone else said it, I think the laity have done a better job keeping and expounding the faith then the wolves in shepards clothing we have now, Groeshels a perfect example, in fact the entire Ewtn netwrk should be officially supressed as a danger to the faith. I personally have seen more offensive material there then anything in FE
IMO IMO IMO
just because a mouse lives in a cookie jar it doesn't make him a cookie.
Groshel wears a monks habit it doesn't make him St Francis or Benedict, or Benard.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)