Evangelicals and the Church

[sadie2723]

One more thing that I am going to point out here. As my good friend, and fellow student of history, Church Militant so eloquently pointed out to you. You are WAY short on facts and WAY long on Propaganda.

Now, I am assuming here that you are not just conjuring this stuff up out of your head. That said, you must be reading it or hearing it somewhere. I am not sure if it is from the pulpit or if it is from some book you got your hands on from a “respected” Protestant author. Yet, I feel compelled to pose this challenge to you. Look into it! Look into all of the points that you made. Now, don’t go back to the same tired sources, and don’t use Catholic ones either…I don’t want to bias the research. I want you to look hard at the statements you made; as there is one thing that runs throughout them all…they are all false.

Once you prove that to yourself, I want you to ask yourself these questions.

1. If the people that I trusted taught me things that were not true, should I continue to trust them?
2. If the people that I trusted taught me things that were not true, should I trust them on bigger issues…such as my eternal salvation?
3. How deep does the deception run? Is this just one guy and one source, or is it many people and many sources…all of which are telling lies? If it is many sources, and they are all “respected” Protestants, should I then put my faith in a movement that builds its very foundation on lies?

Point to ponder…these were the three questions that I had to deal with in my past too. Thus, I am now a Roman Catholic.

Be warned of one thing. If you have the stones to ask these questions, the long path leads only one place. Rome. If you are scared of the journey…do not start it. For once you go down the path of light…forever will it dominate your destiny. Ok, so I have to give partial credit to Yoda for that last sentence. But, I am serious…once you start to poke your own holes in the Protestant ship, you will quickly determine that the whole argument does not float.

Cheers!

 

[Eden]

Eden:

Alfie’s comments have as much substance as Evangelical theology. It is no wonder she is so inept at discussing history, “to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant” (Cardinal John Henry Newman, 19th century convert from Anglicanism).

Contarini:

And to suggest, as Eden does, that Alfie’s theology is somehow representative of evangelicalism is truly ridiculous. One might as well suggest that Eden is representative of Catholicism.

Edwin

Really? You might want to check out the book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark A. Noll, an evangelical.

Here is the opening sentence of the book “The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.”

Here are some reviews available on amazon.com:

**Editorial Reviews

---

Amazon.com
The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, by Mark Noll, is “an epistle from a wounded lover.” Noll loves God and he loves academics, but he is wounded because many of his colleagues deny the possibility of maintaining the integrity of both loves. Noll’s epistle is a memoir, a historical study, and a wide-ranging piece of cultural criticism that argues, “The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.” **Noll considers the effects of evangelical intellectual atrophy on American politics, science, and the arts, and he ultimately offers wise and practical advice for readers who want to explore the full intellectual implications of the incarnation of Christ. –Michael Joseph Gross

From Publishers Weekly
Claiming that “the scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind,” historian Noll sets out to trace the reasons for what he sees as the great divorce between intellect and piety in North American Evangelical Christianity. In a breathtaking panorama of evangelical history from the Great Awakenings to the present, Noll shows that early Evangelicals like Jonathan Edwards embraced the use of reason as an expression of faith in the Creator of the natural world. The advent of Fundamentalism and Pentecostalism, Noll contends, with their emphases on dispensationalism and other-worldliness, fostered anti-intellectualism. Since politics and science, in the form of the religious right and creationism, have been the secular arenas in which the Evangelical mind has most publicly expressed itself, Noll focuses on them to explore ways in which the mindlessness “scandal” has created a lack of adequate Christian thinking about the world. Finally, Noll is hopeful that the work of contemporary Evangelical scholars will recover a respect for intellect. Required reading for those seeking to understand the often peculiar relationship between Evangelical religion and secular culture, this is a brilliant study by–yes–a first-rate Evangelical mind.

Apparently I’m not the only one who views Evangelicalism as anti-intellectual.

 

[NonDenom]

Are you going to keep on track with your original premise about how Catholicism is the cause of the rise of Nazism?

Hi All
I think that what Alfie is talking about here is the fact that the Catholic church turned its back on on the Jews, and did not stand up to Germany. They were weighing the polical ramifications over the spiritual.
In Him and Only Him

 

[sadie2723]

Eden:

Really? You might want to check out the book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark A. Noll, an evangelical.

Here is the opening sentence of the book “The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.”

Here are some reviews available on amazon.com:

Editorial Reviews

---

Amazon.com
The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, by Mark Noll, is “an epistle from a wounded lover.” Noll loves God and he loves academics, but he is wounded because many of his colleagues deny the possibility of maintaining the integrity of both loves. Noll’s epistle is a memoir, a historical study, and a wide-ranging piece of cultural criticism that argues, “The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.” **Noll considers the effects of evangelical intellectual *atrophy ***on American politics, science, and the arts, and he ultimately offers wise and practical advice for readers who want to explore the full intellectual implications of the incarnation of Christ. –Michael Joseph Gross

From Publishers Weekly
Claiming that “the scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind,” historian Noll sets out to trace the reasons for what he sees as the great divorce between intellect and piety in North American Evangelical Christianity. In a breathtaking panorama of evangelical history from the Great Awakenings to the present, Noll shows that early Evangelicals like Jonathan Edwards embraced the use of reason as an expression of faith in the Creator of the natural world. The advent of Fundamentalism and Pentecostalism, Noll contends, with their emphases on dispensationalism and other-worldliness, fostered anti-intellectualism. Since politics and science, in the form of the religious right and creationism, have been the secular arenas in which the Evangelical mind has most publicly expressed itself, Noll focuses on them to explore ways in which the mindlessness “scandal” has created a lack of adequate Christian thinking about the world. Finally, Noll is hopeful that the work of contemporary Evangelical scholars will recover a respect for intellect. Required reading for those seeking to understand the often peculiar relationship between Evangelical religion and secular culture, this is a brilliant study by–yes–a first-rate Evangelical mind.

Apparently I’m not the only one who views Evangelicalism as anti-intellectual.

I am totally buying that book!

 

[Eden]

NonDenom:

Hi All
I think that what Alfie is talking about here is the fact that the Catholic church turned its back on on the Jews, and did not stand up to Germany. They were weighing the polical ramifications over the spiritual.
In Him and Only Him

You are making that claim based on… what? History is not with you or Alfie on that statement. Did you notice that she started this thread based on “a book she once read” but she could not provide the name or author and vaguely remembers reading some sort of article in “Billy Graham’s magazine”? You can disagree with me that Evangelicalism is anti-intellectual. I think you both have proven my point.

 

[Eden]

sadie2723:

I am totally buying that book!

God gave us minds for a “reason”. Thinking and being Christian are not antithetical.

 

[sadie2723]

Eden:

NonDenom:

You are making that claim based on… what? History is not with you or Alfie on that statement. Did you notice that she started this thread based on “a book she once read” but she could not provide the name or author and vaguely remembers reading some sort of article in “Billy Graham’s magazine”? You can disagree with me that Evangelicalism is anti-intellectual. I think you both have proven my point.

You are SO right on there. Worse yet is the denial of thought by the modern Evangelical. I see this time and again. The propaganda that they have been exposed to, no matter how full of holes it is, has taken root in such a manner within their lives that they would not see a fact if it bit them. It is sad…really.

There is a reason that our dear Alfie has not posted anything other than, “in a book I read once” in reference to citation…the reason is that it is tough to argue intellectual views from a doctrine that is void of intellectual merit.

 

[Contarini]

Eden:

Really? You might want to check out the book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark A. Noll, an evangelical.

Apparently I’m not the only one who views Evangelicalism as anti-intellectual.

Actually, Noll’s example tells against you. Noll is a far more valid spokesperson for evangelicalism than Alfie. He’s not some voice crying in the wilderness. He’s a respected, mainstream evangelical figure.

I did not dispute that American evangelicalism has anti-intellectual tendencies. I disputed the idea that you can take one person’s remarks on a forum as representative of evangelicalism as a whole.

Evangelicalism does have a problem with anti-intellectualism. But if Noll is right, this is not endemic to historic evangelicalism but to the form it’s taken in the past century or so. I’m not sure Noll is entirely right–I think he’s way too dismissive of the Wesleyan tradition in particular.

There’s something rather mean about taking an evangelical’s effort to reform evangelicalism and using it to prove that reform is impossible. Rather like anti-Catholics using Fr. Cantalemessa’s sermon on justification to prove that Rome is hopelessly wrong.

The fact that a major evangelical figure has diagnosed the problem shows that the problem is not as deep-rooted or irreversible as you suggest.

Do you have any idea how many evangelical liberal arts colleges there are out there? I went to one, and I hope to get a job at another one.

Edwin

 

[Eden]

Contarini:

I did not dispute that American evangelicalism has anti-intellectual tendencies. I disputed the idea that you can take one person’s remarks on a forum as representative of evangelicalism as a whole.

Alfie’s anti-intellectual method of research illustrates the premise of Mark Noll’s book quite well.

 

[Contarini]

Eden:

Alfie’s anti-intellectual method of research illustrates the premise of Mark Noll’s book quite well.

Let me get this straight. So if I observe a Catholic behaving in some way that falls short of Catholicism at its best, and then I find a book by a prominent Catholic saying that this particular problem is common within Catholicism, I have the right to dismiss Catholicism altogether?

I have no interest in doing this, even if you gave me permission. It’s a nasty game you’re playing, and I won’t play it.

Catholicism and evangelicalism both have problems that are endemic to our respective traditions. That’s why we need each other–it is not a reason to dismiss each other.

Edwin

 

[sadie2723]

Contarini:

Let me get this straight. So if I observe a Catholic behaving in some way that falls short of Catholicism at its best, and then I find a book by a prominent Catholic saying that this particular problem is common within Catholicism, I have the right to dismiss Catholicism altogether?

I have no interest in doing this, even if you gave me permission. It’s a nasty game you’re playing, and I won’t play it.

Catholicism and evangelicalism both have problems that are endemic to our respective traditions. That’s why we need each other–it is not a reason to dismiss each other.

Edwin

That is really not the point. The point is being able to have an academic discussion about matters, and the fact that one side is not capable of doing so. This is the reason for the book in question.

It is very hard to have a system of belief that is based on personal opinion and then maintain that it should somehow be credible.

I also do not see where the Catholic faith needs Evangelicals what so ever. Why do we need people to throw lies at us? Does this make us stronger? Rather I do see that Evangelicals need the Catholic Church…who would they hate if not us? They would have to move on to groups that are less socially acceptable, and that might have a deleterious effect on membership.

 

[Eden]

Contarini:

Let me get this straight. So if I observe a Catholic behaving in some way that falls short of Catholicism at its best, and then I find a book by a prominent Catholic saying that this particular problem is common within Catholicism, I have the right to dismiss Catholicism altogether?

I dismiss Evangelicalism because it teaches error.

The only truths found in Evangelicalism are those teachings from the Church that the men who founded Evangelicalism did not throw away.

The fact that Alfie illustrates the premise of Noll’s book that Evangelicalism is anti-intellectual is one way that I am illustrating that the belief-system is in error.

Contarini:

I have no interest in doing this, even if you gave me permission. It’s a nasty game you’re playing, and I won’t play it.

I would suggest that you pray about your personal feelings about me. I’m sure I’m not the only one who is puzzled by your “extreme” interpretation of my posts as a “nasty game”.

Contarini:

Catholicism and evangelicalism both have problems that are endemic to our respective traditions. That’s why we need each other–it is not a reason to dismiss each other.

I don’t agree. There is only one Church that teaches infallibly on matters of faith and morals. “That’s why we need eachother”? The Church does not need Evangelicalism. The Church exists independent of Protestantism - something that is not possible to say about Protestantism which exists soley as “not Catholic”.

 

[Church_Militant]

NonDenom:

Hi All
I think that what Alfie is talking about here is the fact that the Catholic church turned its back on on the Jews, and did not stand up to Germany. They were weighing the polical ramifications over the spiritual.
In Him and Only Him

This is just more rhetoric without substance.

Offer proof, or withdraw the statement.

Since we have the evidence of factual history and Papal documents from the time in question as well as at least one book from a Jewish source that documents the actions of the Catholic Church to assist the Jews in escaping from Nazi opression, I would say that you had better be very very sure that your sources are historically accurate before you attempt to make you case.

I suppose that among many many others, the martyrdom of St. Maximillian Kolbe in Auschwitz for their published resistance to the Nazis just counts for naught.

1940 November 21: After several requests Father Maximilian is allowed to publish one issue of the Knight of the Immaculata with a press run of 120,000 copies, dated December 1940 - January 1941.

1941 February 17: He is arrested and taken to Pawiak Prison in Warsaw by the Gestapo where he is cruelly treated.

1941 May 28: Father Maximilian is transported in a trainload of prisoners to Oswiecim (Auschwitz) where is is tattooed with the number 16670.

1941 July 28 - August 1: Between this five-day period Fritsch, the Commandant, sentences ten prisoners from Block 14 to death by starvation in retaliation for an escaped prisoner from their block. Father Maximilian’s offer to die for one of the condemned, Francis Gajowniczek, is accepted. The condemned are placed in the basement bunker of Block 13.

1941 August 14: Father Maximilian is killed by an injection of lethal acid.

http://www.consecration.com/image309.gif Source

Furthermore I can find no record of ANY “Evangelical” of that era making so much a pitiful whimper in opposition to the Nazi genocide. At least Dietrich Bonhoeffer had the guts to pay the price for his Lord and for Germany, bute he was not “Evangelical”. The rest have nothing to say and just lay down before the Nazis.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[magdelaine]

This story is my personal favorite. Although it only involves “saving” one person, it illustrates an overall attitude that cannot be denied by the most persuasive propaganda to the contrary. The real heart of our Church beats within.

The Girl on the Train

 

[sadie2723]

Church Militant:

NonDenom:

This is just more rhetoric without substance.

Offer proof, or withdraw the statement.

Since we have the evidence of factual history and Papal documents from the time in question as well as at least one book from a Jewish source that documents the actions of the Catholic Church to assist the Jews in escaping from Nazi opression, I would say that you had better be very very sure that your sources are historically accurate before you attempt to make you case.

I suppose that among many many others, the martyrdom of St. Maximillian Kolbe in Auschwitz for their published resistance to the Nazis just counts for naught.

http://www.consecration.com/image309.gif Source

Furthermore I can find no record of ANY “Evangelical” of that era making so much a pitiful whimper in opposition to the Nazi genocide. At least Dietrich Bonhoeffer had the guts to pay the price for his Lord and for Germany, bute he was not “Evangelical”. The rest have nothing to say and just lay down before the Nazis.
Pax vobiscum,

I agree. It is time to put forth a source on this madness.

And, where are those fantastic Evangelicals out there that were fighting for the Jews? Hmmm.

If I were to make the bold claim that the Catholics of the period were pro-Nazi, I would want something to stand on. Otherwise, it looks like just another lie of the Evangelicals to try and tarnish Rome. If it is such a lie, I have really bad news for you. The gates of hell will not prevail against my church…so your little taunts are going to get you nowhere.

 

[Alfie]

sadie2723:

The depth of hatred for the Catholic Church knows no bounds. I have always been a believer that you should read more than just propaganda before making a decision…an idea that has been lost on many Evangelicals.

Hey! Why don’t you ask Elie Weisel for some references concerning the role of your church during the war?

 

[Eden]

Alfie:

Hey! Why don’t you ask Elie Weisel for some references concerning the role of your church during the war?

How about this article?

www.rense.com/general70/conff.htm

**Conclusion **

**Elie Wiesel, so admired by many U. S. Catholic leaders, is in fact a con man who has enriched himself with his tall tales. Although courted by various misguided Church representatives, he is actually an outspoken enemy of traditional Catholicism, and should play no role whatsoever in Catholic life in this country. It is also evident that both Wiesel and the NYT are comfortable using true lies to promote the Jewish holocaust story and, in turn, Israel. Even worse, it is appalling that Wiesel, in his drive to become a multi-millionaire (he charges a standard fee of $25,000 per appearance and demands a chauffeur-driven car to go with it), and media personality, has so heartlessly exploited the suffering and death of his parents and sister at the hands of the Nazis. In falsifying his “memories” for personal gain, Wiesel has trivialized the personal tragedies of not only his closest family members, but also of all those, Jews and Gentiles, who died in the camps. The old shame of the JOW was, and is, the documented deaths of all too many innocent Jews during the war. The new shame of the JOW is the ongoing media exploitation of those deaths by people like Wiesel and the editors of the New York Times. **

Or how about this one from Albert Einstein during WWII?

**www.users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html **

---

We must remember that the Holocaust was also anti-Christian. After Hitler revealed his true intentions, the Catholic Church opposed him. Even the famous Albert Einstein testified to that. According to the December 23, 1940 issue of Time magazine on page 38, Einstein said:

Being a lover of freedom, when the revolution came in Germany, I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but, no, the universities immediately were silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks…

Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler’s campaign for suppressing truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly.

In another, similar statement, Einstein referred explicitly to the Catholic Church (Lapide, p. 251). This is an extraordinary testimony by an agnostic German scientist of Jewish heritage. Even though there were traitors in her ranks, the Church still opposed the Nazi movement.

 

[Church_Militant]

Alfie:

Hey! Why don’t you ask Elie Weisel for some references concerning the role of your church during the war?

Eden beat me to that one.
Thanks My friend!

 

[Eden]

Church Militant:

Eden beat me to that one.
Thanks My friend!

It’s rare. You are always on the ball. Thanks.

 

[Alfie]

Eden:

How about this article?

www.rense.com/general70/conff.htm

Conclusion

Elie Wiesel, so admired by many U. S. Catholic leaders, is in fact a con man who has enriched himself with his tall tales. Although courted by various misguided Church representatives, he is actually an outspoken enemy of traditional Catholicism, and should play no role whatsoever in Catholic life in this country. It is also evident that both Wiesel and the NYT are comfortable using true lies to promote the Jewish holocaust story and, in turn, Israel. Even worse, it is appalling that Wiesel, in his drive to become a multi-millionaire (he charges a standard fee of $25,000 per appearance and demands a chauffeur-driven car to go with it), and media personality, has so heartlessly exploited the suffering and death of his parents and sister at the hands of the Nazis. In falsifying his “memories” for personal gain, Wiesel has trivialized the personal tragedies of not only his closest family members, but also of all those, Jews and Gentiles, who died in the camps. The old shame of the JOW was, and is, the documented deaths of all too many innocent Jews during the war. The new shame of the JOW is the ongoing media exploitation of those deaths by people like Wiesel and the editors of the New York Times.

Or how about this one from Albert Einstein during WWII?

www.users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html

---

We must remember that the Holocaust was also anti-Christian. After Hitler revealed his true intentions, the Catholic Church opposed him. Even the famous Albert Einstein testified to that. According to the December 23, 1940 issue of Time magazine on page 38, Einstein said:

Being a lover of freedom, when the revolution came in Germany, I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but, no, the universities immediately were silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks…

Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler’s campaign for suppressing truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly.

In another, similar statement, Einstein referred explicitly to the Catholic Church (Lapide, p. 251). This is an extraordinary testimony by an agnostic German scientist of Jewish heritage. Even though there were traitors in her ranks, the Church still opposed the Nazi movement.

I looked at your link. The home page for the website sounds like it deals with conspiracy theories. Most likely it is a bogus site.