Did you hear Joel Osteen/Pentecostal pastor make fun of the Catholic Baptism?

[Zosimas]

The essence of the Baptist faith is non-sacramental. The essence of the Catholic faith is sacramental. That’s not ecumenism, that’s Olsteen saying that there are no sacraments.

The essence of both is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Surely this is the case?

But I’m interested in your perspective: is there something in Olsteen’s teaching which you think reveals an anti-sacramental position? Perhaps you could show us instances of such a thing, so that the context of the joke might be better explained. Maybe you could show that Olsteen views the essence of Baptist and Catholic Christianity from this sacramental point of view that you have?

 

[Pregustator]

Oh, come on; who cares what Joel Osteen said? In the first place, I’m not going to lose any sleep over that mild joke.

Secondly and more importantly, why are Catholics actually sitting around watching his show to begin with? He’s a motivational speaker, not a Christian leader. He’s a charlatan. And a real Catholic shouldn’t have to be told that, after the fact. Did you actually start watching the show thinking he was a Catholic priest until he came out with his little joke? Spare me.

If you want to lynch the guy, there’s plenty of real reasons to hang him without us having to pull out the torches and pitchforks over a goofy little joke. Leave it alone.

Joel Osteen. Please.

 

[Cat_Herder]

The essence of both is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Surely this is the case?

The essence of the Catholic Faith is obedience to Jesus Christ and all that He and His Apostles commanded. The essence of the Baptist faith is trusting in Jesus Christ while ignoring many of the things that He and His Apostles commanded, such commandments being deemed as unnecessary. They both involve Jesus Christ but they’re not the same thing. (Just so you know, baptized Trinitarian Baptists go to heaven provided they do not sin mortally.)

But I’m interested in your perspective: is there something in Olsteen’s teaching which you think reveals an anti-sacramental position?

He has the Sinner’s Prayer and the (false) assurance of salvation at the end of every broadcast.

 

[Tamsulosin]

Read it again.It is I that is saying that accumulating wealth is not the Christian message,
as I understand it.
I guess he lost a lot of points with me when he mentioned by name the Catholic Church to make a joke.He had no need to go there and it is telling about his ways.
A huge crowd follows him.You too ,I gather.I concede he has a feel good message.
Should everybody feel good, even some who may have commited mortal sins?
The end result seems to be to leave the oratorium very happy.Not a bad thing in itself,but joy should depend on clean spirits,not just on positive thinking that life is great and prosperity is at hand.
Again my opinion.

 

[Zosimas]

The essence of the Catholic Faith is obedience to Jesus Christ and all that He and His Apostles commanded. The essence of the Baptist faith is trusting in Jesus Christ while ignoring many of the things that He and His Apostles commanded, such commandments being deemed as unnecessary. They both involve Jesus Christ but they’re not the same thing. (Just so you know, baptized Trinitarian Baptists go to heaven provided they do not sin mortally.)

There are dozens and dozens of perspectives that we could point out as being the ‘essence’ of both. Many of these perspectives will overlap, and many will be drastically different. The question my interpretation of Olsteen’s joke raises, is whether a person should focus on those perspectives which overlap, or whether we should only see those which are different. If it is the former, as I feel the logic of the joke insinuates, then Olsteen is behaving himself.

The ‘moral’ of his joke, for me, is a very simple one. A fish is a fish no matter its species, what sort of water it lives in, or whether it is large or small. It cannot become a cow, an elephant or a cheetah. Christians are all such fish, and they must all be loved within the context of their very natures.

Whether or not there are implications of such a ‘moral’ which contradict Catholic theology or ecclesiology has no bearing on whether or not such implications were intended. Moreover, to see such implication, to my mind, is highly defensive and overly sensitive. It even tends to verge on a sort of bashing in and of itself, because it wants to find something ugly before it considers other options.

 

[Tamsulosin]

Oh, I forgot to answer about the motto he asks the crowd to recite.
People have to state that they will NEVER, NEVER be the same after they listen him.Come on!
(does that includes his jokes?)

 

[Cat_Herder]

Whether or not there are implications of such a ‘moral’ which contradict Catholic theology or ecclesiology has no bearing on whether or not such implications were intended. Moreover, to see such implication, to my mind, is highly defensive and overly sensitive. It even tends to verge on a sort of bashing in and of itself, because it wants to find something ugly before it considers other options.

Forget about Joel Olsteen for a moment and think about the audience. He is telling them that all they have to do is say a prayer to ensure their eternal salvation. That is not true. There are no “options” here.

The reason for the response you’re seeing here is concern for the congregants.

 

[Zosimas]

Forget about Joel Olsteen for a moment and think about the audience. He is telling them that all they have to do is say a prayer to ensure their eternal salvation. That is not true. There are no “options” here.

The reason for the response you’re seeing here is concern for the congregants.

Are you so sure that everyone in the crowd suddenly thought to themselves about how silly Catholic sacraments are? If they did, then Olsteen confirmed for them a prejudice. But perhaps not everyone is prejudiced and bitter. If they did not think this, then why did they laugh? Perhaps they thought along my lines, and wondered at how silly it is for different fish look down and condescend to one another. Who is to tell? Certainly not me, but someone whose justice is perfect.

Again, whether or not there are implications of the logic of the joke which contradict Catholic theology, does not in and of itself prove that such implications were intended, and neither that they were thus perceived.

Moreover, I think the issue of concern is invalid. I see no thread wherein people post photographs of non-Catholic Church services, and shake their heads at what is being taught and how lost such souls are. But this thread, instead, looks at a joke, not for its theology, but because of a perception of bitterness and hatred for Catholics. I repeat that bitterness and hatred are not the only things to be understood from this joke, and to look for such ugliness is to assume a disgusting and sinful shrewdness of a heart whose essence cannot be seen.

 

[Tamsulosin]

Nobody implied here “bitterness or hatred”.Too dramatic.You assumed that.
I do not believe there is any hatred or bitterness in Osteen.
I do not believe ,on the other hand, that the joke is “innocent” either. Or that it was not planned.
Inciting people to laugh about a person or institution creates disrespect for it,by making it
a laughable subject.
Say, as an example, someone is joking about your family(mentioning your name) and beliefs on public television. The CC is my family, and I did not like it.
Would you?

 

[Cat_Herder]

Are you so sure that everyone in the crowd suddenly thought to themselves about how silly Catholic sacraments are?

No, and again, that’s not the point.

If they did, then Olsteen confirmed for them a prejudice. But perhaps not everyone is prejudiced and bitter. If they did not think this, then why did they laugh? Perhaps they thought along my lines, and wondered at how silly it is for different fish look down and condescend to one another. Who is to tell? Certainly not me, but someone whose justice is perfect.

Yes, and He commanded them to repent and be baptized. Olsteen leaves that out.

Again, whether or not there are implications of the logic of the joke which contradict Catholic theology, does not in and of itself prove that such implications were intended, and neither that they were thus perceived.

I’m not the Just Judge and I’m not passing judgment on him. He is teaching a deficient soteriology. I don’t know if it is intentional or not and that part is not my concern. I am supposed to contend for the faith once for all handed to the saints, so is Olsteen, and for motives unknown to me he is not doing so.

 

[Zosimas]

I am supposed to contend for the faith once for all handed to the saints, so is Olsteen, and for motives unknown to me he is not doing so.

Well, certainly he is not Catholic. This in and of itself may be a massive fault, or it may have very little meaning in the wider scheme of things. What is undoubted, is that his personality and teaching will not be Catholic, just as it will not be Buddhist.

But I’ve noticed also that neither your nor I have been spelling his name correctly. I suppose neither of us know very much about him, then.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Well, certainly he is not Catholic.

Catholics are not the only Christians who teach that baptism is necessary for salvation. It is in the Bible. Accordingly it is the majority view among Christians worldwide.

 

[4Squarebaby]

Are you so sure that everyone in the crowd suddenly thought to themselves about how silly Catholic sacraments are? If they did, then Olsteen confirmed for them a prejudice. But perhaps not everyone is prejudiced and bitter. If they did not think this, then why did they laugh? Perhaps they thought along my lines, and wondered at how silly it is for different fish look down and condescend to one another. Who is to tell? Certainly not me, but someone whose justice is perfect.

Again, whether or not there are implications of the logic of the joke which contradict Catholic theology, does not in and of itself prove that such implications were intended, and neither that they were thus perceived.

Moreover, I think the issue of concern is invalid. I see no thread wherein people post photographs of non-Catholic Church services, and shake their heads at what is being taught and how lost such souls are. But this thread, instead, looks at a joke, not for its theology, but because of a perception of bitterness and hatred for Catholics. I repeat that bitterness and hatred are not the only things to be understood from this joke, and to look for such ugliness is to assume a disgusting and sinful shrewdness of a heart whose essence cannot be seen.

judging from the youtube link given earlier it is how he begins every sermon. just as the Tonight Show audience laughs with differing intensities to every joke Jay Leno gives in his opening monologue the congregation is prepared to laugh at that particular point of the service and will laugh no matter what the pastor said.

 

[Zosimas]

Your observation, 4Square, is very, very sound.

 

[GaryTaylor]

While only he knows his true intent. And it well may have been innocent. What is obvious is that most Catholics here felt something by his comment. The flags definatly went up, no denial of that. That in itself says something.

 

[Zosimas]

That in itself says something.

It could very well say a great deal about the Catholics who were offended by the joke.

I will tell you what I think it says about the OP. Perhaps the offense that he felt, that so moved him to start this thread, was a product of guilt he might have been feeling about watching Osteen to begin with. Perhaps Osteen’s casual little joke acted as salt in a wound that was already opened up by Osteen’s preaching.

If this is the case, then I feel the offense was justified. Indeed, I think it odd that anyone should even begin to analyse Osteen as being non-Catholic, and therefore espousing non-Catholic beliefs. So much should be obvious. But to think that the man had bad intentions with his humour, I think, is not justified.

 

[HCC]

Dear Tamsulosin,

Read about the Carthusian Martyrs in England:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthusian_Martyrs

this is how they died:

The method of execution was hanging, disembowelling while still alive and then quartering.

Read about the Vietnamese Martyrs: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_Martyrs

They died the most torturous deaths imaginable.

We Catholics have faced far worse than a few snide remarks from a clown who picks up a Bible to wield for his financial gain. The deaths of these holy men and women should speak to you about the truth and beauty that lies within Holy Mother Church. Don’t be discouraged when nitwits with a Bible poke fun at Christ’s Church. He is with us until the end.

 

[Cat_Herder]

If this is the case, then I feel the offense was justified. Indeed, I think it odd that anyone should even begin to analyse Osteen as being non-Catholic, and therefore espousing non-Catholic beliefs. So much should be obvious. But to think that the man had bad intentions with his humour, I think, is not justified.

Again, he is espousing and advocating non-Biblical beliefs that are also non-Catholic. This is not just Osteen vs the angry Catholics. It is Osteen vs the Bible, or to depersonalize it, televangelism vs the Gospel.

 

[Faith1960]

Go one YouTube or his website and actually listen to what was said before you judge.

Here is the joke he said:

*A Baptist lived in a neighborhood that was filled with Catholics. On Fridays, this man likes to barbecue steak on the grill in his backyard. The neighbors didn’t like this because they could eat only fish on Fridays. The neighbors worked real hard over the next few months to convert him to be a Catholic. It worked and the man was baptized. During his Baptism, the priest sprinkled water over him and said “You were born a Baptist, you were raised a Baptist, and now you are Catholic.”

The next Friday everyone to their surprise could smell a steak being cooked on the barbecue. The man was sprinkling salt over the steak, saying “You were born a cow, you were raised a cow, now you are a fish.”*

It is a joke. It is not anti-Catholicism.

The joke, in that context, IS funny.

 

[Tamsulosin]

Zosimas,first let me tell you I enjoy your style of writing being an amateur writer myself(mostly poetry, but some prose too).
But re. the topic we are discussing,you are completely wrong.You are wrong about my gender also,I am a woman.
The morning of the controversial joke I had not started the tv but rather family members put it on. Sunday mornings the tv is often kept going as people go about doing
their things.One program finishes, other starts. Osteen’s started and I heard him.
I had listened to him a couple of times in the past and I had liked him ,I must confess.
I did not know what protestant faith he professed either,until this occurred and I looked it up.I knew he is not Catholic but his message is sort of general,has not defined liturgy.
But guilt,what are talking about? Why would I feel guilty"like salt to a wound"?
Like I said your language is rich and I like the images you create.And I do not say it ironically, I mean it.
Again I doubt Mr Osteen goes in front of such vast audience to improvise.
What he includes in his repertoire is planned.He did not just happen to think of a joke.
Laughing at people or institutions is a way of descrediting,be condescending ,not taking them seriously(Sara Palin is an example,aside of wether we like her or not).Well known tool used by polititians.
Because he is a leader,he may well influence his crowd to make light of our beliefs.