# Roman Catholic Megachurch



## Scott (Apr 19, 2006)

This Catholic church is born again - Evangelical approach helps attendance soar

If you want big numbers, it is more about style than message (with the exception that the message must be basic and uncontroversial)


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Apr 19, 2006)

When I read the occasional social-commentary article by a self-professed RC, I am struck by the "familiarity" (for lack of a better term) demonsrated with Jesus, the Savior. The reason I'm struck has to do with something Patrick (puritansailor) said on another thread: that Romanism most often reflects whatever culture it gets embedded in.

In perfect honesty, the Jesus of the Medieval Church, and (in fact) the Jesus of Romanism in most of the rest of the world today, is an utterly unapproachable figure. The people know next to nothing about him. The few stories of his earthly life they may know something about. But the person of Jesus is a stranger. The Jesus-figure who terrorized Luther is alive and well. But is not often glimpsed in an American context.

Here in America is different from elsewhere. The Bible is ubiqutous. Vatican II officially permitted lay access to the Scripture (whereas before, papists were *not* to read the Bible). Now many papists are Bible-literate, at least to the point of knowing significantly more content from the gospels. And if the hierarchy ever attempted to remove the Bible again from a western Roman setting, I venture to suppose that those who truly valued the Scriptures would find themselves in a repeat of the Reformation quandry--which way do I go? Do I leave the "mother church," or do I stay in and go underground?

Since "ignorance is the mother of devotion," don't expect much encouragment to read the Scriptures to ever come out of Rome. And do expect that if Romanism grows much in the west, it will be at the expense of biblical literacy. The half-informed American evanjellyfish is being sucked into a Roman church that is also half-informed. Modern western Romanists are "familiar" with Jesus, the same Jesus that the modern evangelical has half-gotten to know, and half-forgotten (or never met).

The typical modern evangelical is either headed toward liberalism/unbelief (as mentioned on Reformation21 blog) or toward Romanism (as the link at the top shows), whether he knows it or not. How few of them seem to be turning back to evangelical/protestant roots!


----------



## Cuirassier (Apr 19, 2006)

Well said!

dl

[Edited on 4-19-2006 by Cuirassier]


----------



## Scott (Apr 19, 2006)

It does seem that allot of Catholics I talk to on the net (the ones I know in real life are indistinguishable from secularists) see little importance in the Bible. There are two main exceptions. The first is the apologists, and they tend to only really focus on the apologetic texts. The second exception is the former protestants (eg. Scott Hahn or Gerry Matatics), who have imported their protestant love of scripture into their new Catholic setting.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Contra_Mundum_
> When I read the occasional social-commentary article by a self-professed RC, I am struck by the "familiarity" (for lack of a better term) demonsrated with Jesus, the Savior. The reason I'm struck has to do with something Patrick (puritansailor) said on another thread: that Romanism most often reflects whatever culture it gets embedded in.
> 
> In perfect honesty, the Jesus of the Medieval Church, and (in fact) the Jesus of Romanism in most of the rest of the world today, is an utterly unapproachable figure. The people know next to nothing about him. The few stories of his earthly life they may know something about. But the person of Jesus is a stranger. The Jesus-figure who terrorized Luther is alive and well. But is not often glimpsed in an American context.
> ...


Great analysis. You should be blogging.


----------

