Campus Crusade For Christ

[Zski01]

bengal_fan:

almost well said. while i agree with your heart behind this statement, i wouldn’t say there are anti-catholics in ccfc but misinformed protestants who don’t understand the catholic church. i don’t think anyone in ccfc is calling the catholic church the “whore of babylon” or the pope the “antichrist” or anything like that. i know you didn’t mean that but i felt i need to clarify that with folks in here.

Fair enough. That’s exactly what I meant…thanks for the clarification!

 

[Zski01]

Sola:

Fidelis, I agree with the point you have made, even as you have let Bill Bright’s words speak on their own. To me, it’s scary.

CCFC, like most evangelical Protestant organizations, is inherently anti-Catholic. Their message, as bengal_fan pointed out, is so much on having “an experience with Christ” or having a “personal relationship with Jesus”. That is just so Protestant. It’s all about an individual person’s feelings and his/her interpretation. (I don’t mean any offense, bengal_fan.)

Hmmm…

I have a personal relationship with Christ, and I don’t see that as a solely Protestant theological point at all. I think to say the Church is unnecessary is more of a “solo scriptura” (don’t confuse with sol***a ***scriptura) point, but I don’t think that’s what they mean in asserting one has a personal relationship with Christ.

Is that what you meant?

 

[jmm08]

The students who get involved with CCFC are urged to attend Church every Sunday. So they are not a solo scriptura group (Bible only and don’t go to church). When I was on the “Summer Project”, my recollection is that we were in small groups (about a dozen students each group) and each small group was assigned to a church.

Probably the churches chose themselves as being willing to have some CCFC students come for the summer. I was assigned to a nice Lutheran Church on Lewers Street, Waikiki – they had a beautiful panoramic view of the Pacific Ocean with giant windows and their sanctuary had a top floor location. It was such a beautiful view that I can still see it in my mind if I close my eyes and want to and almost feel young again. I think it was Prince of Peace Lutheran Church. Jesus, if you make a place in heaven for me be sure to put a lot of those beautiful blue colors in my room. Thank you!

Before we took communion (early that summer), I remember that the minister there told my group about transubstantiation. I suppose that we needed to know that to be in communion with his church. He probably told us about consubstantiation (but you must admit that consubstatiation is a more difficult concept to grasp and an even harder word to remember). It is easier to believe what Jesus says in the Bible in the Upper Room (the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of our Lord). And John Chapter 6. God knew what was going to happen (Protestants vs. Catholics on this topic). If He meant symbolic, He should have plainly said so. So many years later my new Baptist minister said “No. It is only a symbol.” And each time communion is offered he uses the word “symbolic”. That just totally spoils it for me. My RC parrish priest explained that it is symbolic in the Baptist Church (because the minister is not validly ordained). Which is one main reason why I am coming over and waiting for RCIA. I’m glad that we had a new Baptist minister to straighten it out.

I don’t know that any Roman Catholic students were on the “Summer Project”.

 

[P.Mark_Petro]

Attended a luncheon yesterday where Marcus Grodi spoke. Marcus ,a former protestant, was once involved with CCC and admitted to going after young Catholics and being successful at it. Say what you want, Catholics should keep their children away from CCC in my opinion. Local parishes or diocese need to do a better job of giving young Catholics an alternative to CCC. We are losing young Catholics as a result.

 

[uncleauberon]

HI all,

Campus Crusade does have something anit-Catholic in their Statement of Faith----

campuscrusade.com/statement_of_faith.htm

The sole basis of our beliefs is the Bible, God’s infallible written Word, the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. We believe that it was uniquely, verbally and fully inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it was written without error (inerrant) in the original manuscripts. It is the supreme and final authority in all matters on which it speaks.

If they were not Anti-Catholic – they would not have made it such a point to “number” the books of the bible.

They could have said – We believe the Bible is the infallable Word of God.

Many other non-denominational and inter-denominational organizations - leave the Definition of the “Bible” open. They also leave room for “Tradition”. By neither confirming or denying it’s role at the “Word”

todd

 

[Contarini]

:Try to put the best spin on his words as you can, but I maintain they speak for themselves.:

Well no, they don’t, unless you understand where he’s coming from theologically. To an evangelical, being a Christian is a matter of a personal relationship with Jesus, not of belonging to an organized church (though paradoxically most evangelicals are devoted supporters of a local church). As others have pointed out, evangelicals know quite well that many people listed statistically as Catholics do not practice their faith, and they furthermore believe that it is possible to be a very “religious” person but not really know Jesus. I’m not disputing that Mr. Bright probably believed that this was a particular problem for Catholics, but I’ll bet you anything he would have said that Anglicans in England or Lutherans in Germany also needed evangelization (and in fact CCC is active in those countries as well, I’m pretty sure). He was specifically addressing the issue of Catholicism because he was arguing against conservative evangelicals who opposed signing any accord with Catholicism. Also, Catholics tend to count all people baptized as Catholics as Catholics unless they clearly identify with some other church or religion. That being the case, Catholics can’t really blame evangelicals for talking about evangelizing Catholics. If Catholics had stricter standards for who counts as a Catholic, you would be on stronger grounds. But if you want to claim whole populations as Catholic because of their baptism and their historical ties, then don’t blame evangelicals for evangelizing these “Catholics” who frequently do not practice the Christian faith.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Fidelis]

:Try to put the best spin on his words as you can, but I maintain they speak for themselves.:

Well no, they don’t, unless you understand where he’s coming from theologically. To an evangelical, being a Christian is a matter of a personal relationship with Jesus, not of belonging to an organized church (though paradoxically most evangelicals are devoted supporters of a local church). As others have pointed out, evangelicals know quite well that many people listed statistically as Catholics do not practice their faith, and they furthermore believe that it is possible to be a very “religious” person but not really know Jesus. I’m not disputing that Mr. Bright probably believed that this was a particular problem for Catholics, but I’ll bet you anything he would have said that Anglicans in England or Lutherans in Germany also needed evangelization (and in fact CCC is active in those countries as well, I’m pretty sure). He was specifically addressing the issue of Catholicism because he was arguing against conservative evangelicals who opposed signing any accord with Catholicism. Also, Catholics tend to count all people baptized as Catholics as Catholics unless they clearly identify with some other church or religion. That being the case, Catholics can’t really blame evangelicals for talking about evangelizing Catholics. If Catholics had stricter standards for who counts as a Catholic, you would be on stronger grounds. But if you want to claim whole populations as Catholic because of their baptism and their historical ties, then don’t blame evangelicals for evangelizing these “Catholics” who frequently do not practice the Christian faith.

In Christ,

Edwin

Thanks for your comments, but I maintain Bill Bright’s words speak for themselves. What he MAY have said about Lutherans or Anglicans is a moot issue since the whole point is that he HAS gone on record regarding **Catholics ** specifically.

Blessings,
Fidelis

 

[La_Chiara]

Why is it that these evangelical organizations are not up front about what they are? Why don’t they call themselves “Protestant, or evangelical”? Instead they call themselves “Christian” or “non-denominational Christian”. I submit this misrepresentation is intentional in order to confuse and to lure Catholics and other denominational Protestants in. Mormons also do this–the first thing they do is talk to you about how they are the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”, emphasizing the Jesus Christ. I seems to me that every Catholic organization is always up front about the fact that it is Catholic. I am not suggesting that Catholics should play the same game. But it makes me crazy how these evangelical, fundamentalist Protestant organizations are always purposely evasive about what they are. That goes for, Campus Crusade for Christ, Young Life, Navigators, Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, etc. And furthermore, where do they get off staking claim to the term “Christian” as if they are Christian and Catholics are not! As in “I am Christian”. Well, I am too, a Catholic Christian, a member of the one true church of Christ!