The Liquid Church

[Theologian in Training]

This is a "church" right down the street from us. Up until now, we really did not see them as much of a threat, that is, until they started doing a Q&A on Catholicism. You can find the misrepresentation of Scripture, Tradition and Mary here http://internetcampus.liquidchurch.com/pages/page.asp?page_id=101709

I am going to be meeting with him later on this month

God Bless

Fr. Brian

[Lil Red]

+JMJ+
they should learn to spell.

[Marie-Therese]

I didn't listen to it, mainly because I was just so irritated at the website. That's probably judgmental of me, but oh well.

After a brief perusal of the website, sounds like he's just another one of those people who likes to grab tons of followers with a touchy-feely "gospel" without all the nastiness of mentioning that stuff called sin. People who want to get "guilt-free religion" are deluded...who would need religion if there was no guilt to begin with? We'd all still be in the Garden, happy as clams. His explanation of his group's name is weak. If he was wanting to reference the Water unto Eternal Life, I think I'd come up with something more effective than calling it "liquid church." Liquid church just sounds like something with no form, that is malleable to whoever is holding it, and can transmit just about anything...oh wait.

Hope your meeting with him is productive for his soul, Fr. Brian. This scourge of Kumbayah Christianity is harmful to souls. I know firsthand, having been a Protestant myself at one point.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='11 March 2010 - 01:04 PM' timestamp='1268330654' post='2071024']
+JMJ+
they should learn to spell.
[/quote]


I didn't say it but I am glad you did.

Hard to take their "sereis" very seriously.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[color="#2F4F4F"]gess wut[/color]

[spoiler][color="#2F4F4F"]imo, speling is over rated and maybe kind of c[color="#2F4F4F"]rap[/color].[/color]
[/spoiler]

[Nihil Obstat]

I think everyone should write in IPA. That way you can write in accents.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='11 March 2010 - 11:12 AM' timestamp='1268331129' post='2071032']
I didn't listen to it, mainly because I was just so irritated at the website. That's probably judgmental of me, but oh well.

After a brief perusal of the website, sounds like he's just another one of those people who likes to grab tons of followers with a touchy-feely "gospel" without all the nastiness of mentioning that stuff called sin. People who want to get "guilt-free religion" are deluded...who would need religion if there was no guilt to begin with? We'd all still be in the Garden, happy as clams. His explanation of his group's name is weak. If he was wanting to reference the Water unto Eternal Life, I think I'd come up with something more effective than calling it "liquid church." Liquid church just sounds like something with no form, that is malleable to whoever is holding it, and can transmit just about anything...oh wait.

Hope your meeting with him is productive for his soul, Fr. Brian. This scourge of Kumbayah Christianity is harmful to souls. I know firsthand, having been a Protestant myself at one point.
[/quote]
+JMJ+
when I heard "Liquid Church", I thought, Do they meet in a bar? Do they serve Jesus beer, or Jesus shots?

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='11 March 2010 - 01:22 PM' timestamp='1268331758' post='2071051']
+JMJ+
when I heard "Liquid Church", I thought, Do they meet in a bar? Do they serve Jesus beer, or Jesus shots?
[/quote]

I thought that too. I was like, is liquid church kind of like liquid courage, only the religious kind?

We think too much alike sometimes.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='11 March 2010 - 11:25 AM' timestamp='1268331926' post='2071053']
I thought that too. I was like, is liquid church kind of like liquid courage, only the religious kind?

We think too much alike sometimes.
[/quote]
+JMJ+
it comes with the hair

[Theologian in Training]

Thought you might be curious as to my email that prompted his response. I have removed last names and locations because of the public nature of the board

Hello Pastor Tim,

My name is Fr. Brian, I am the associate pastor at St. Margaret's Church. I was informed about your current series whereby you are answering questions that people may have towards the Catholic Church. However, I feel it necessary to let you know that, while in the beginning of your presentation, your history was correct, the application of it is incorrect. In fact, the first question that Church asks when dealing with Scripture, is where did Scripture come from? While you say that we say the Bible + Tradition = Truth, it is actually reversed, because Tradition, as we understand it is different than the way you are applying it. For example, as I am sure you are aware, the Scriptures developed organically, that is, there was no set "Table of Contents" when the Bible first came to be, that "Table of Contents" developed as a result of small communities, where Christians would gather, and where they would hear the Word of God. Those books that were read were then widely accepted, which, in its early inception, were only the Gospels and some of St. Paul's letters, not even all of them. This happened in the 2nd century. All other books of the Bible were "up in the air," as it were, and there was no "canon" as we call it to speak of until a Church Father by the name of St. Athanasius decided to put the controversy to rest. He did so in what are known as his "Festal Letters," and it was in these letters that he declared that there should be 46 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. This happened in the year 367, many years before Martin Luther was even born.

Also, I feel that I should also correct you on the fact that when speaking of Tradition, there are two understandings of it. There is what we call big "T" tradition and little "t" tradition. This is an important distinction that has to be made, otherwise, there is the temptation to confuse the two thinking that they are the same. Just recently, I printed something in the bulletin on this, which I think you might find helpful, and which I will paste at the end of this email.

Understand I am not trying to be cruel nor was looking to find fault in your presentation, in fact, like I said, your history is pretty solid. I felt, however, that just as you would like us to represent your beliefs accurately, we would like for you to represent ours with the same accuracy. I thank you for your time and pray that God will always be with you in your ministry.

God bless,

Fr. Brian

P.S. the write up on Tradition/tradition can be found below

[b]What is Tradition?[/b]

Quite simply, Tradition is the “deposit of faith,” the faith handed down to us from Jesus to the Apostles, to the Church today. As the Catholic author and apologist, Patrick Madrid explains it: “Consider this analogy: An acorn is the same identical thing as the oak tree it grows into, even though they appear different.” He then goes on to use the example of the Doctrine of the Trinity, stating how different our understanding of it was in the second century than it is today. Our vocabulary and our understanding has advanced, but it has not changed the “essence” of how we understand the Trinity to this day. One is usually tempted to call this a change in the doctrine but that would not be correct, a better understanding for it is that it develops, it grows in the same way, to use Madrid’s example, an acorn becomes a tree. Nothing new is invented and nothing is completely altered to the point that it ceases to be a doctrine, rather, it is organic and living, and just like that anything that has life within it, it grows, it matures, it develops.

Madrid speaks about how he was in a public debate with a Protestant minister who challenged him to give him an example, outside the Bible, but necessary for all Christians. Madrid explains how he dropped his Bible in front of the minister explaining that the canon of Scripture, that is, the books that belong in the Bible was born from Tradition, and that, in fact, the Bible, as we have it today, is the result this same Tradition. The handing on by preaching, teaching, praying, writing and especially ritual actions, like baptism with water, the breaking of the bread and laying on of hands were all the result of Tradition. In fact, Madrid recommends comparing current Catholic teaching to ancient Church teaching to see the slight differences but overall similarities that have been preserved for over 2000 years. As Scott Hahn puts it: “When you go to Mass, you live the Bible.”

Often, as it happens, when speaking about Tradition, there is a distinction that occurs between the “big T” and the “little t” of Tradition. What this means is that, depending upon which “t” they are, determines our adherence to it. For example, not eating meat on Fridays was a very big thing in the Church years ago and, in fact, is still “on the books” of the law of the Church known as “Canon Law,” but this is not a “big T” Tradition, rather, it is a “little t,” it is one of those things that help us to grow in holiness but is not essential to the faith. Something like Mary’s Immaculate Conception, however, is a “big T” because it is essential to our faith to believe that Mary was born free of sin, for if she was not, then Jesus was born to a woman of sin and things get a little difficult.

The best way to look at it is to see the “little t” as man-made, not doctrinal, more customs and disciplines of the Church (celibacy falls under this as well). A couple more examples would be saints days, sometimes it will happen that a saint who was on the calendar, no longer is, or is “rotated” for another one, there are only a few holy days that rarely ever move, but they, too, have been known to have moved. These would be those types of traditions that could be changed. On the other hand, the “big T” are, indeed, doctrinal and, therefore, unchangeable. For example, that big word "transubstantiation" which means, a change of substance but not accidents (that is, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood, though they maintain the appearance of bread and wine. While that may seem outlandish, many miracles have confirmed this to be true, where the consecrated bread has become living flesh in someone's mouth) is one that fall under big "T." Actually, anything we call dogma would be considered big "T." However, it is important to note that while "man" is the one who enacts that dogma, it is merely an affirmation of what has always remained true. As Madrid puts it, they are “not man-made but God-made. Part of the body of revealed truth given to the Church by Christ and the Apostles, as the Holy Spirit inspired them to teach and explain these revelations.”

I realize I went into some depth and great detail, but I think it is important to make the distinction and to help to understand a very important part of our faith because it is the lack of clarity between the two that leads, all to often, to confusion, doubt and misunderstanding.

[CatherineM]

I thought maybe a church in a swimming pool. We had one in an old drive-in theater in Florida. Instead of a swim-up bar, you could have a swim-up communion rail. It would have to be completely filled with holy water.

[Apotheoun]

Like many talks of this kind Pastor Tim's presentation is massively simplified, and because it involves over-simplification it states Church teaching inaccurately (e.g., Pastor Tim's comments on [i]Humanae Vitae[/i]).

[Nunsense]

[quote name='Theologian in Training' date='12 March 2010 - 06:02 AM' timestamp='1268334144' post='2071082']
Thought you might be curious as to my email that prompted his response. I have removed last names and locations because of the public nature of the board

Hello Pastor Tim,

My name is Fr. Brian, I am the associate pastor at St. Margaret's Church. I was informed about your current series whereby you are answering questions that people may have towards the Catholic Church. However, I feel it necessary to let you know that, while in the beginning of your presentation, your history was correct, the application of it is incorrect. In fact, the first question that Church asks when dealing with Scripture, is where did Scripture come from? While you say that we say the Bible + Tradition = Truth, it is actually reversed, because Tradition, as we understand it is different than the way you are applying it. For example, as I am sure you are aware, the Scriptures developed organically, that is, there was no set "Table of Contents" when the Bible first came to be, that "Table of Contents" developed as a result of small communities, where Christians would gather, and where they would hear the Word of God. Those books that were read were then widely accepted, which, in its early inception, were only the Gospels and some of St. Paul's letters, not even all of them. This happened in the 2nd century. All other books of the Bible were "up in the air," as it were, and there was no "canon" as we call it to speak of until a Church Father by the name of St. Athanasius decided to put the controversy to rest. He did so in what are known as his "Festal Letters," and it was in these letters that he declared that there should be 46 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. This happened in the year 367, many years before Martin Luther was even born.

Also, I feel that I should also correct you on the fact that when speaking of Tradition, there are two understandings of it. There is what we call big "T" tradition and little "t" tradition. This is an important distinction that has to be made, otherwise, there is the temptation to confuse the two thinking that they are the same. Just recently, I printed something in the bulletin on this, which I think you might find helpful, and which I will paste at the end of this email.

Understand I am not trying to be cruel nor was looking to find fault in your presentation, in fact, like I said, your history is pretty solid. I felt, however, that just as you would like us to represent your beliefs accurately, we would like for you to represent ours with the same accuracy. I thank you for your time and pray that God will always be with you in your ministry.

God bless,

Fr. Brian

P.S. the write up on Tradition/tradition can be found below

[b]What is Tradition?[/b]

Quite simply, Tradition is the “deposit of faith,” the faith handed down to us from Jesus to the Apostles, to the Church today. As the Catholic author and apologist, Patrick Madrid explains it: “Consider this analogy: An acorn is the same identical thing as the oak tree it grows into, even though they appear different.” He then goes on to use the example of the Doctrine of the Trinity, stating how different our understanding of it was in the second century than it is today. Our vocabulary and our understanding has advanced, but it has not changed the “essence” of how we understand the Trinity to this day. One is usually tempted to call this a change in the doctrine but that would not be correct, a better understanding for it is that it develops, it grows in the same way, to use Madrid’s example, an acorn becomes a tree. Nothing new is invented and nothing is completely altered to the point that it ceases to be a doctrine, rather, it is organic and living, and just like that anything that has life within it, it grows, it matures, it develops.

Madrid speaks about how he was in a public debate with a Protestant minister who challenged him to give him an example, outside the Bible, but necessary for all Christians. Madrid explains how he dropped his Bible in front of the minister explaining that the canon of Scripture, that is, the books that belong in the Bible was born from Tradition, and that, in fact, the Bible, as we have it today, is the result this same Tradition. The handing on by preaching, teaching, praying, writing and especially ritual actions, like baptism with water, the breaking of the bread and laying on of hands were all the result of Tradition. In fact, Madrid recommends comparing current Catholic teaching to ancient Church teaching to see the slight differences but overall similarities that have been preserved for over 2000 years. As Scott Hahn puts it: “When you go to Mass, you live the Bible.”

Often, as it happens, when speaking about Tradition, there is a distinction that occurs between the “big T” and the “little t” of Tradition. What this means is that, depending upon which “t” they are, determines our adherence to it. For example, not eating meat on Fridays was a very big thing in the Church years ago and, in fact, is still “on the books” of the law of the Church known as “Canon Law,” but this is not a “big T” Tradition, rather, it is a “little t,” it is one of those things that help us to grow in holiness but is not essential to the faith. Something like Mary’s Immaculate Conception, however, is a “big T” because it is essential to our faith to believe that Mary was born free of sin, for if she was not, then Jesus was born to a woman of sin and things get a little difficult.

The best way to look at it is to see the “little t” as man-made, not doctrinal, more customs and disciplines of the Church (celibacy falls under this as well). A couple more examples would be saints days, sometimes it will happen that a saint who was on the calendar, no longer is, or is “rotated” for another one, there are only a few holy days that rarely ever move, but they, too, have been known to have moved. These would be those types of traditions that could be changed. On the other hand, the “big T” are, indeed, doctrinal and, therefore, unchangeable. For example, that big word "transubstantiation" which means, a change of substance but not accidents (that is, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood, though they maintain the appearance of bread and wine. While that may seem outlandish, many miracles have confirmed this to be true, where the consecrated bread has become living flesh in someone's mouth) is one that fall under big "T." Actually, anything we call dogma would be considered big "T." However, it is important to note that while "man" is the one who enacts that dogma, it is merely an affirmation of what has always remained true. As Madrid puts it, they are “not man-made but God-made. Part of the body of revealed truth given to the Church by Christ and the Apostles, as the Holy Spirit inspired them to teach and explain these revelations.”

I realize I went into some depth and great detail, but I think it is important to make the distinction and to help to understand a very important part of our faith because it is the lack of clarity between the two that leads, all to often, to confusion, doubt and misunderstanding.
[/quote]


Very charitably said and accurate as well. Good job.

[Theologian in Training]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='11 March 2010 - 05:33 PM' timestamp='1268343205' post='2071202']
Like many talks of this kind Pastor Tim's presentation is massively simplified, and because it involves over-simplification it states Church teaching inaccurately (e.g., Pastor Tim's comments on [i]Humanae Vitae[/i]).
[/quote]

Well, it is clear that he did not even consult a Catholic as he trudged his way through the Catechism. A clear indication of the fact that he is unaware of what he is actually saying is when he called Humanae Vitae "Human" Vitae. It is not just oversimplified, it is horribly skewed, which is why I will be meeting with him on the 16th.

[Hilde]

I rubbed my eyes before going to phatmass and somehow misread this thread title as the lipsync squid.

[BG45]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='11 March 2010 - 02:15 PM' timestamp='1268331346' post='2071038']
I think everyone should write in IPA. That way you can write in accents.
[/quote]

The International Phonetic Alphabet is evil incarnate, true story.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='BG45' date='11 March 2010 - 06:20 PM' timestamp='1268353227' post='2071376']
The International Phonetic Alphabet is evil incarnate, true story.
[/quote]
aj hæz æ sæd.

IPA ɪz so gʊd fɔɹ mɛnij θɪŋz.

[Hilde]

bæææææ says the sheep.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='BG45' date='11 March 2010 - 07:20 PM' timestamp='1268353227' post='2071376']
The International Phonetic Alphabet is evil incarnate, true story.
[/quote]

Note to self: send BG a thank you note for telling me what IPA stood for so I would not have to look dumb asking.

[Nihil Obstat]

I love how θɪŋz is how we say <things>. That's awesome.