RENEW International

Participants in the RENEW International ministry gain a deeper appreciation for the Catholic Church. They experience a renewed connection to the greater Catholic community and discover how to use the principals of their trust to daily life. People, and parishes benefit from the support, ideas, curricula, events, and trust-sharing materials of RENEW International.

RENEW International is a not-for profit Catholic organization which serves the spiritual needs of people in the U.S. and around the world. Based in the Archdiocese of Newark, NJ, RENEW was first devised by Msgr. Tom Kleissler who teamed with Msgr. Tom Ivory to realize a new vision for the Church. RENEW International advocates dividing parishes into smaller, belief-sharing communities and identifying and empowering leaders among laypeople. Their programs for adult belief formation impart inspirational strength and teach participants how to interpret Scripture and connect it to their lives. Followers ascertain how to live in accordance with the Gospel and keep the deep, compassionate love of God.

Through RENEW International, parishioners learn to trust and support one another as they gather to study, reflect, and pray. Participants of RENEW International curricula experience a rejuvenated spirit. They become more committed, filled Catholics with a stronger relationship with God.

Posted by admin as Education + Schooling, Misc, Religion Info at 4:39 AM CST

Comments Off

Classical Apologetics is an approach to apologetics based upon attempted deductive demonstrations of God’s existence and character and includes such exemplars as Plato, Aquinas, the early Augustine, Geisler, and Sproul.

Classical apologetics which, according to my understanding, attempts to prove the existence of God through deductive arguments. The primary reason I consider this approach virtually ineffective is because I do not believe God’s existence can be irrefutably proven through the utilization of logical and rational arguments. Man’s reasoning ability is too restricted. Human ingenuity cannot reach so high as to logically and theoretically prove, without the inkling of a doubt, the existence of God.

The problem with the various arguments, whether it be the cosmological (God as efficient cause) or the teleological (God as final cause), or any other form, in the great final analysis God is not proven or necessarily indicated. The objections of atheists or other non-believers and critics to these arguments are very succinct, detailed, and not easily ignored. For example, suppose the opposition responds to the cosmological argument for God’s existence in the following manner:

Why does the uncaused cause have to be God? If there must be a first uncaused cause, what proof is there that it is God? It may just as well be the world, or an “existence” but not necessarily God as the Christian conceive of Him.

Who can argue that the opposition makes a valid point?

Even if we think in terms of the world as being in the process of decaying (second law of thermodynamics), it fails to prove absolutely that the world was not always in existence. The second Law implies that if the present deterioration continues, the universe will subsequently die. But non-believers may consider the word IF to be of vital importance for their argument that the world has always existed. Suppose the deterioration process discontinues? Suppose it slowly begins a process of reparation? If the world was always in existence, and man having not always been in existence and therefore incapable of observing space and time immemorial, is it not possible to conceive of a vicissitudinous world; that is, a world that experiences phases of deterioration and reparation?

Of course, to think this way a person would certainly have to believe in the idea of a self created universe. And even though this notion may repulse the Christian, the inevitable question the non-Christian may legitimately pose is: Is the notion of a self created world any more absurd or irrational than the idea of a self created God?

Apologists who utilize this approach to defending the faith are seemingly, on an argumentative treadmill; constantly moving but going nowhere.

If someone asserts the belief that no God exists, his claim cannot be positively refuted. I cannot conceive of any rational possibility for a strict proof or an adequate demonstration of God which could prevail over and against such an assertion. There just isn’t any absolute, or to borrow from Kant, purely rational way to prove God’s existence that will pass universal inspection and carry universal conviction.

Therefore, classical apologetics, in my estimation, fails to deduce God by theoretical reasoning. It neglects to assure with infallible certainty the existence of God. Consequently, it falls short as an effective method of clarifying and defending the Christian truth.

The bottom line: credo ut intelligam.

Rev. Saundra L. Washington, D.D., is an ordained clergywoman, veteran social worker, and Founder of AMEN Ministries. She is also the author of two coffee table books: Room Beneath the Snow: Poems that Preach and Negative Disturbances: Homilies that Teach which can be reviewed on her site. Her new book, Out of Deep Waters: My Grief Management Workbook, though delayed in publication, is expected to be available early 2006.

You have an open invitation to visit us at AMEN Ministries: Your Soul’s Service Station for reviewing spiritual services being offered, obtain spiritual refreshing and soul edification, get your daily dose of humor, browse our newly expanded Stop & Shop Store and to visit our prayer sanctum for quiet time with God.

Blessings to all!

Posted by admin as Religion Info at 7:08 PM CDT

Comments Off

Divorce and Remarriage

Ray Stark

—————————————————————–
—————

This is a subject that has caused much heartache, spiritual
shipwreck and tragic loss of ministry potential. I am not
speaking of the heartache of broken homes and broken dreams
which are the inevitable results of a failed marriage, but
rather the legalistic and unbiblical attitudes which bring
lifelong guilt and bondage to many believers as a result of not
rightly dividing the New Testament teaching on this subject.

As the church of Jesus Christ our mandate is to set the captives
free, not put heavier chains on them and then kick them off the
dock and into the deep waters of discouragement and despair.
Hopefully the following paper will bring freedom and peace to
many who read it.

NOTE: As we study this subject please keep in mind that Jesus
was talking to Jews under the Old Covenant and Paul is writing
to the Church under the New Covenant. When you take this into
account you find no discrepancy between the teachings of Jesus
and those of Paul.

JESUS ON DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE

“What does Moses (The Law) say?” (Mark. 10:1-12)

Mark 10:1 And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts
of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort
unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again. 2 And
the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man
to put away his wife? tempting him. 3 And he answered and said
unto them, What did Moses command you? 4 And they said, Moses
suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. 5
And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your
heart he wrote you this precept. 6 But from the beginning of the
creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a
man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And
they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain,
but one flesh. 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let
not man put asunder. 10 And in the house his disciples asked him
again of the same matter. 11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever
shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery
against her. 12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and
be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Under the Law Remarriage is Legitimate in Some Cases

Remarriage is permissible under the law when divorce is the
result of sexual immorality. (Matt 19:3-9 also see Matt 5:31,32)

Matt 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and
saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for
every cause? 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not
read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male
and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father
and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall
be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh.
What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put
asunder. 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give
a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto
them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you
to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it
be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth
adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit
adultery. 10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man
be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11 But he said
unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom
it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born
from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were
made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is
able to receive it, let him receive it.

NOTE: For believers, sexual infidelity should be grounds for
forgiveness and reconciliation, not an excuse for divorce. Moses
made his concession because of the hardness of their hearts.

Please keep in mind that Jesus is teaching Jews under the law of
Moses in the scriptures quoted above. We need to look at the
writings of Paul on the subject in order to find out what the
teaching to the church is on the subject of divorce and
remarriage.

PAUL’S TEACHING ON DIVORCE

In 1 Corinthians the seventh chapter Paul give us the New
Testament teaching on divorce and remarriage. He is apparently
in answering questions the Corinthian church sent to him asking
for a definitive doctrinal teaching on the subject.

1 Cor 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me:
It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 Nevertheless, to
avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let
every woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render unto
the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the
husband. 4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the
husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own
body, but the wife. 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be
with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting
and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not
for your incontinency. 6 But I speak this by permission, and not
of commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as I
myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after
this manner, and another after that. 8 I say therefore to the
unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as
I. 9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is
better to marry than to burn. 10 And unto the married I
command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from
her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried,
or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put
away his wife. 12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any
brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to
dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which
hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to
dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving
husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is
sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but
now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him
depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such
cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16 For what knowest
thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how
knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

Note: In vs 10 Paul emphatically states that what he is about to
write concerning the married believers is a direct command from
Jesus Christ Himself, “I command, yet not I, but the Lord”. He
is not going to disagree with Jesus in the following teaching,
he is going to deliver the command the Lord gave Him for the
church. First he states unequivocally that it is not the will of
God for either husband or wife to give up on their marriage and
seek divorce.

Depart: 5563 cwrizw chorizo kho-rid’-zo AV-depart 8, separate 3,
put asunder 2; 13

Mark 10:9″What therefore God joined together let not man put
asunder”

Paul makes it very clear that Christian couples should expend
every effort to make their marriage work and even if they
divorce they should keep the door open for restoration by
avoiding remarriage. It is probably good to note at this point
that there is nothing mentioned here about fornication or
adultery either as the cause of divorce or as a legitimate
reason to reason to remarry. Neither is there any curse
mentioned for remarriage.

Paul now moves on to the case of a believer married to an
unbeliever. Keep in mind that there were no believers in Corinth
before Paul founded the church there so there were probably
quite a few instances in which one member of an existing
marriage relationship became a believer and their spouse
remained unsaved. This is not talking about a believer making
the decision to marry an unbeliever as so often happens
nowadays. Paul covers that in his “be not unequally yoked”
teaching in 1 Cor 6:14.

1 Cor 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother
hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with
him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which hath an
husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with
her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is
sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified
by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are
they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A
brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God
hath called us to peace.

Paul uses the same terminology here as he does speaking of the
liberty to remarry without reference to sin that comes after the
death of a spouse.

Rom 7: 1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know
the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as
he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the
law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be
dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if,
while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she
shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she
is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she
be married to another man.

1 Cor 7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband
liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be
married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

PAUL ON REMARRIAGE

In vs 27 Paul finally gets around to the subject of remarriage
after covering the various marriage and divorce scenarios in the
church. His definitive command to every believer is “If you are
married, don’t look for a divorce. If you are divorced, it would
be better to remain single but if you remarry you have not
sinned.”

1 Cor 7:27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed.
Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. 28 But and if thou
marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not
sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I
spare you.

NOTE: Divorce is an awful thing, and is to be avoided at all
cost. It is not however, the unforgivable sin. Nor does divorce
and remarriage constitute ongoing adultery. The Blood of Christ
cleanses from ALL sin and ALL unrighteousness.

—————————————————————–
————— http://www.celebratingjesus.org copyright 2003
Ray and Sharon Stark

Posted by admin as Religion Info at 4:13 AM CDT

Comments Off

I had a letter published in The Blade (Toledo, Ohio) and sent to
President Reagan, pleading with him not to commit the folly of
creating any foolish “Martin Luther King Day.” Our fellow black
Americans, generally speaking, still hated President Reagan
after the fact and still don’t practice the good things (there
were some good things) King preached.

If we’re to be judged by the content of our character rather
than the color of our skin, why continue to demand quotas and
curves and tolerate such racist organizations as the NAACP?

Why doesn’t somebody do a documentary on those humble folk
marching back then (with their useful idiot whites, too many
liberal Jews) with a split screen exposing “niggas with
attitude” (a black phrase), the rampant crime, outrageous rates
of illegitimacy, unemployment by choice, gangs, welfare
projects, black on black violence (not to mention assault on
others), the “menace to society” mentality (another black
phrase, thanks to excellent director Albert Hughes),
disproportionate black prison population and the verbal lynching
concerned blacks suffer mercilessly when they dare speak out
against such inexcusable poverty of the spirit and moral
degradation, slavery to sin and self-destruction?

It is appropriate on this black holiday (and that’s what it
amounts to, in all honesty), to consider this issue of race from
a biblical perspective that those horribly brainwashed by the
politically correct cult hate with a passion and rage against in
vile anarchist fashion, drowning out any reason and voice other
than their own.

Regardless, this biblical truth must be shared, must be made
known, while we still have the freedom to exercise our God-given
rights of speech and religion.

Is interracial marriage wrong? Did God intend for the races to
be separate? Did God divide the nations to preserve distinct
family ties?

The plain truth is made known in Race Matters.

Posted by admin as Religion Info at 12:00 PM CDT

Comments Off