 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Steven Barrett
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | Hadley, Absurdistan, AKA , Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 1566 |
| First Name: | Steven | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, Episcopal communicant, Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 04:15 am |
|
Northstar, I loved the way Rick put it. ('Course he's not going tell his gator it's not going to make it past the Pearly Gates, not with it smiliing back at St. Peter with its pearlies. The gator knows better. St. Peter knows this one, too.)
All kidding aside, Rick's private views, albeit unofficial, are far superior to the strict by the book cold shoulder my wife's received from some fellow evangelical protestants. Not that they didn't emphasized with her loss, but when it came to discussing the afterlife, they didn't even bother to offer any possibility of hope that God's mercy would override the strict interpretations of the Book. After all, they've taken the words of Jesus that he didn't come to change a thing in the Bible as a literal to the punction-mark statement without looking deeper into what Jesus was trying to really say: i.e., "Look, I'm not going to get bogged down in a scripture parsing or proof texting string arguments and setup jobs from the Pharisees and Scribes." He didn't mean those words to say like so many Protestants are wont to say, "My Father wrote it, I support it, that settles it."
It's been four years since the coldness has settled in when we lost a dear five year old cat during a routine medical check up. What irked me, both of us, was the slowness of the pastor in coming around to consoling her (since it happened before her eyes). We weren't expecting them to change any doctrines or say something that was off the beam, but this cleric and his "leadership team" -- with the exception of two men -- dropped the ball. I returned to Rome the following year and while my wife hasn't left yet, she also hasn't taken any interest in returning on Sundays.
It's one thing to briefly explain where Scripture is silent, but it's another thing when the pastoral leadership of a church or denom or non-denom are deliberately silent as well when a dear pet dies, esp. unexpectedly so.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but is it a sort of rule of thumb for evangelical churches to send out a silent or hinted message discouraging pet ownership because the money going into their care and feeding "could better be sent" to help us "save lost souls" elsewhere? (Yeah, like Italy? Oh, yeah, I know of an American Baptist church that recently "commissioned" a woman to save souls in Italy. "RIGHT" as the Coz would say. Nerve I say.)
There just seems to be this "Well ... that money could be better spent ... " message. Is it a widespread schtick?
In the meantime, I'm looking forward to seeing my old pets some day.
____________________
James Michael Curley to a young Thomas “Tip” O’Neill -- “Son, it’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1611 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 04:29 am |
|
| In all my time as a baptist I never heard anything about not having pets in order to spend the money on more worthwhile projects. Everyone I knew had a dog or cat or both. We were encouraged to tithe, in fact we were put on a guilt trip if we didn't. And we were encouraged to contribute to whatever building project was going on, over and above our tithe. But I never heard about the expense of pets until you mentioned it.
|
|
|
NorthStar
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 105 |
| First Name: | Chuck | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 03:40 pm |
|
Steven Barrett wrote
It's one thing to briefly explain where Scripture is silent, but it's another thing when the pastoral leadership of a church or denom or non-denom are deliberately silent as well when a dear pet dies, esp. unexpectedly so.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but is it a sort of rule of thumb for evangelical churches to send out a silent or hinted message discouraging pet ownership because the money going into their care and feeding "could better be sent" to help us "save lost souls" elsewhere? (Yeah, like Italy? Oh, yeah, I know of an American Baptist church that recently "commissioned" a woman to save souls in Italy. "RIGHT" as the Coz would say. Nerve I say.)
There just seems to be this "Well ... that money could be better spent ... " message. Is it a widespread schtick?
I don't think it's widespread. I've heard that once or twice by a pastor on TV, and I've heard a few Evangelicals at least imply that, but it is not widespread in my experience. Or at least it wasn't at the time I was active in the Evangelical world. (pre 2002)
However the poor way in which most Protestants handle death of pets, lack of sympathy like you experienced is fairly common. I found it particularly common among Calvinists, (though I was never a Calvinist I learned alot about their beliefs at one time and listened to quite a few pastors) but also in the Evangelical movement it seems to be fairly common as well. Of course these are the same people who when a HUMAN family member dies, they're not past saying, "well so and so wasn't saved, t9o bad they're in hell right now". So it doesn't surprise me they wouldn't care about someones cat dying.
But I've only once, maybe twice heard anyone say not to have pets because your money is better spent elsewhere. However, I HAVE heard on many ocassions, that your money is better spent giving to God, even if your starving....which is a whole different issue. 
Not trying to Protestant bash, because 99% are simply just trying to do the best they can with the light they've been given, just as we all are, but certain parts of their theology always made me cringe, even when I was one!
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1611 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 03:56 pm |
|
| Honestly, I must have come from a different protestant planet! You all are saying things about protestants that were never true in my experience! I don't recall ever hearing someone say "so and so wasn't saved - he must be in hell now" or anything close to that. It was more like "poor so and so, I hope the good Lord had mercy" (don't we all hope that) or "he never went to church but he had a good heart, the Lord knows what was in his heart." Protestants love their pets, and sympathize with others when their pets die. Promise.
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 518 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 05:12 pm |
|
NorthStar wrote: Steven Barrett wrote
It's one thing to briefly explain where Scripture is silent, but it's another thing when the pastoral leadership of a church or denom or non-denom are deliberately silent as well when a dear pet dies, esp. unexpectedly so.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but is it a sort of rule of thumb for evangelical churches to send out a silent or hinted message discouraging pet ownership because the money going into their care and feeding "could better be sent" to help us "save lost souls" elsewhere? (Yeah, like Italy? Oh, yeah, I know of an American Baptist church that recently "commissioned" a woman to save souls in Italy. "RIGHT" as the Coz would say. Nerve I say.)
There just seems to be this "Well ... that money could be better spent ... " message. Is it a widespread schtick?
However the poor way in which most Protestants
Ya know Chuck, I have to agree with Marsha. I've been in the Protestant world for all my life. I've attended churches that are more Arminian in emphasis and presently attend a church that purports to have it's roots in Calvinism. (Frankly, I haven't met a true Calvinist in many years) But stereotypes are not a good argument. We have a man in our Sunday School class that is a German who is closer to Calvinism in his theology and steeped in Dispensational Theology. One of his favorite phrases is to say "MOST theologians teach..blah blah blah." When I hear that I simply say to myself...who are these most theologians? In his case, the most theologians are a small minority in the eschatological world. But because his world is nothing but that narrow box of pre-mellianial, pre-rapture outlook, it's most to him.
I find the word most to be a totally meanless statement because all of us are speaking from our limited world of experience unless we have been exposed to a wide variety of beliefs and idiologies. This is not to put you or your statement down. It's simply to identify a danger we have by using broad statements to define a truly limited field of study. I know I'm guilty of this often and need to keep reminding myself, that I don't know it all. The older I get, the less I seem to know because I keep discovering more things to know. (phew...does that make sense?)
As far as the animal issue goes...(to get back on subject) I guess we'll know for sure in heaven when we lie down together with the lions and the lambs that got there before us and listen to the sparrow sitting on our shoulder cheeping in our ears. 
Rich
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 07:01 pm |
|
NorthStar wrote: Only humans get "saved" in that Jesus came to redeem humans and paid the price for our sins. Jesus didn't die on the cross for pets, only for those made in God's image and likeness.
Yes I understand. I was simply using the term "get saved" as generic way of saying "go to heaven"
That's what I understood you to mean, but we always have to remember that for every registered member who frequents our forum, we have a dozen or more unregistered "lurkers" reading our posts, so sometimes we try to clarify things for their benefit even if it's not necessary for the purposes of the original poster. Just covering our bases.....
All we need is for an evangelical Protestant to run around saying that CHNI claims pets are "saved" (in their understanding of the word).
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 518 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 21st, 2008 07:44 pm |
|
CajunRick wrote:
All we need is for an evangelical Protestant to run around saying that CHNI claims pets are "saved" (in their understanding of the word).
This Protestant isn't saying that. I agree Animals are not "saved". Just because the lion and the lamb appear to be in heaven has nothing to do with their salvation other than apparently heaven seems to be populated with animals. Salvation is a term, as I see it, that relates only to humans...or who knows, maybe space aliens.
But the animals haven't sinned...as far as we can determine...and so don't need redemption other than a kind God who allows them into heaven, correcting the natural effects of the fall.
Sigh...I know it's pressing the issue. I just think we sometimes limit God to what he can really do.
For what it's worth...I know...not much huh?
Rich
|
|
|
Steven Barrett
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | Hadley, Absurdistan, AKA , Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 1566 |
| First Name: | Steven | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, Episcopal communicant, Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 03:33 am |
|
 Interesting variety of replies. I, too thought what we experienced might be unusual, and pleased to see it is in some respects. But maybe I was looking into things more from a perspective of newer trends in evangelical activities coming down the pipe. For example; you hear a lot of talk about the need to send x amount of people to save the Muslims (and God forbid, no less, sending one lady out of my family's church to Italy to save the Italians ... sheep stealing in plain English)
So having pets might be a "hinderance" on one's ability to pack up and get going.
But good luck to anybody telling those Snake Handlers in West Virginia they have to give up on their pet rattlers!
However the poor way in which most Protestants handle death of pets, lack of sympathy like you experienced is fairly common. I found it particularly common among Calvinists, (though I was never a Calvinist I learned alot about their beliefs at one time and listened to quite a few pastors) but also in the Evangelical movement it seems to be fairly common as well. Of course these are the same people who when a HUMAN family member dies, they're not past saying, "well so and so wasn't saved, t9o bad they're in hell right now". So it doesn't surprise me they wouldn't care about someones cat dying.
But I've only once, maybe twice heard anyone say not to have pets because your money is better spent elsewhere. However, I HAVE heard on many ocassions, that your money is better spent giving to God, even if your starving....which is a whole different issue
That's pretty hard core Protestantism for you! But here's one you'll love, I know of a man, who after he got the 'ligion bug big time after he heard the Gospel for the first time upon leaving -- you guessed it -- to become an evangelical ... won't even allow for than one or two Christmas gifts and he's making a pretty good income. And no, I didn't see any four legged "dependents" either.
As for getting people to the starvin' n' givin' stages, was this person a victim of Jim Bakker or Jimmy Swaggart? "Don' worry Granny, you won't need any food where you're going." Talk 'bout shearing the sheeple!
____________________
James Michael Curley to a young Thomas “Tip” O’Neill -- “Son, it’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”
|
|
|
beachmoss
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Simpsonville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 298 |
| First Name: | Beth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic (raised Baptist) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26th, 2008 07:12 pm |
|
Just to throw in my two cents--
Our veterinarian is a wonderful Southern Baptist man! He's never discouraged us from not seeking care for our beloved pets. (Of course he's making the money from our visits!) But I do believe that he is quick to point out when a treatment would be unnecessary. He is quite compassionate and has been a good shoulder to cry on when he loses a patient. He even went to extraordinary means in an attempt to save my sister's gerbil! (And didn't charge a dime!)
The United Methodist preschool my daughter attended last year had a very nice memorial service for the class hamster that died.
In my experience, I have never seen a Protestant have a problem with pet ownership, or should I say stewardship. I think, hope, pray that we can all agree that God commissioned man to be stewards of the earth and all its creatures. Unfortunately, I think many have lost sight of that. It has been said that many murderers begin by abusing animals.
I know that I am certainly looking forward to snuggling with my "big sister" Tabby again. I can't want to cuddle Meatball, Ono, Fuzzy, and Sugar again. And I just can't imagine Heaven without my daughter's canary, Bird, singing!
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 518 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26th, 2008 07:47 pm |
|
beachmoss wrote:
I know that I am certainly looking forward to snuggling with my "big sister" Tabby again. I can't want to cuddle Meatball, Ono, Fuzzy, and Sugar again. And I just can't imagine Heaven without my daughter's canary, Bird, singing!
Hey Beth...I like your vet.  Anyone who can treat a gerbil and a hampster would be kind to a ferret too. Yeah...I look forward to seeing my pets too...Muffet and Tuffet, Mitzie, my poodle and spaniel, Tiger and 99, yeah, my white cat's name was 99. (Remember agent 99?) He was always snooping things out. And then of course my latest losses, Sparky, Cricket and Amber. All cats and two dogs. And that doesn't count the fish...too many to name. Neon tetras, angel fish, guppies, goldfish etc, etc. I could never get close to them.
My ferret will live forever...he's my alter ego.
I know, I know...the pair of intellectuals around here can intellectualize our pets out of heaven all they want,  but we know what we know...don't we.  After all, doesn't Jesus come out of heaven riding on a white horse in Revelations? Rev. 19.11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war...
Hmmm...maybe he took the Lone Ranger's horse Silver or Hopalong Cassidy's horse Topper??
Rich
|
|
|
beachmoss
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Simpsonville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 298 |
| First Name: | Beth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic (raised Baptist) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26th, 2008 08:19 pm |
|
Rich,
I so needed a laugh today! Thank you! Seeing Jesus brandishing a flaming sword, swooping down from Heaven, yelling "Hi Ho, Silver!" was just the pick-me-up I needed!!!
Beth
|
|
|
NorthStar
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 105 |
| First Name: | Chuck | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 04:07 pm |
|
rbo4u2 wrote:
Ya know Chuck, I have to agree with Marsha. I've been in the Protestant world for all my life. I've attended churches that are more Arminian in emphasis and presently attend a church that purports to have it's roots in Calvinism. (Frankly, I haven't met a true Calvinist in many years) But stereotypes are not a good argument. We have a man in our Sunday School class that is a German who is closer to Calvinism in his theology and steeped in Dispensational Theology. One of his favorite phrases is to say "MOST theologians teach..blah blah blah." When I hear that I simply say to myself...who are these most theologians? In his case, the most theologians are a small minority in the eschatological world. But because his world is nothing but that narrow box of pre-mellianial, pre-rapture outlook, it's most to him.
I find the word most to be a totally meanless statement because all of us are speaking from our limited world of experience unless we have been exposed to a wide variety of beliefs and idiologies. This is not to put you or your statement down. It's simply to identify a danger we have by using broad statements to define a truly limited field of study. I know I'm guilty of this often and need to keep reminding myself, that I don't know it all. The older I get, the less I seem to know because I keep discovering more things to know. (phew...does that make sense?)
I deeply apologize for offending anyone. I of course was only speaking from my personal experience as Protestant, in which case, the word "most" is 100% accurate.
However I was only speaking from my personal experience, and greatly apologize for stereotyping entire groups of people as a single monolithic block.
Please accept my apologies and I will try and do better in this area from now on.
Chuck
Last edited on Thu Aug 28th, 2008 04:12 pm by NorthStar
|
|
|
NorthStar
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 105 |
| First Name: | Chuck | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 04:11 pm |
|
Credo Catholic wrote: Honestly, I must have come from a different protestant planet! You all are saying things about protestants that were never true in my experience! I don't recall ever hearing someone say "so and so wasn't saved - he must be in hell now" or anything close to that. It was more like "poor so and so, I hope the good Lord had mercy" (don't we all hope that) or "he never went to church but he had a good heart, the Lord knows what was in his heart." Protestants love their pets, and sympathize with others when their pets die. Promise.
I have a friend who tells me the same thing that he never experienced anything like I did as a Protestant. I often times forget that Protestants are not a monolithic block and cannot be lumped into one group....but it is hard to forget certain things as personal scars often run deep. See my above post for an overall apology . . . .
|
|
|
NorthStar
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 105 |
| First Name: | Chuck | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 04:26 pm |
|
Thought I should also say that even though I had some negative experiences in some Protestant groups, I also had many wonderful experiences...and still do to this day. One of my good friends is a Lutheran Pastor, and I attend his Church somewhat regularly.
My problem is what I think of the word "Protestant" I think of it's historic context, as a protest against Rome, and since many Protestant Churches, including most Churches most people have belonged to, or do belong to, aren't really Protesting anything.... but rather are trying to simply live out Christ's example in their life and in the world, I don't really see them as "Protestant" if that makes any sense.
It probably does....and I hesitated to explain myself because it sounds like I'm trying to vindicate my screw up in terms, I'm not....only trying to explain WHY I said what I said. I in no way meant anything other than what I experienced, nor did I mean by "most protestants" the same thing as most "non-Apostolic Churches"....it's my bad as I have a unique perspective on this stuff, and I will do my best to not do this in the future.
Again, if I caused offense, I apologize from the bottom of my heart.  I'm only here to learn and offer what I can, not to put down any Church or anyone.
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 518 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 05:27 pm |
|
No offense Chuck. Even I will lump all Catholics in the same barrel at times. I agree with your assessment of the term Protestant. We do protest too much. And yes, even in my circles there is anti-catholic bias, just not quite so overtly so. Most of the bias I've incountered has been of due to ignorance or this wide-spread confusion in the Protesant world that is actually from secularism which says that what you belief may be valid for you, but I choose the way I believe. That must be overcome before we ever have dialogue.
Quite frankly the worst criticism I've heard are former Catholics who have joined our church. They are very anti-Catholic because they feel that all the Catholic church does is condemn people and talk about nothing but sin rather than love or grace. I'm convinced that they are simply poor catechized Catholics or who have gone through a major crisis of some kind done to them by a priest of parish. I know the Catholic church teaches no such thing because I've read so much of the truth in the Catechism and other Catholic literature.
Bottom line, I'm not offended at all. I was just trying to cut through the all inclusive stuff.
God bless
Rich
|
|
|
Steven Barrett
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | Hadley, Absurdistan, AKA , Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 1566 |
| First Name: | Steven | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, Episcopal communicant, Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 06:15 pm |
|
Even I will lump all Catholics in the same barrel at times.
I love that sentence Rich!
But, Good Heavens, not all of us are like Herr und Frau Governator Schwarzenegger, Rudy Giuliani, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Eleanor Smeal, Jean Sebilius, Kate Michelman, and John Kerry for starters. Most of those pitbulls belong to that former parishoner of Rev'd Wrong. And he can keep 'em.
That's one hell of a rotten barrel this dawg would be howling, yipping, and pawing to jump out of!
Last edited on Thu Aug 28th, 2008 06:18 pm by Steven Barrett
____________________
James Michael Curley to a young Thomas “Tip” O’Neill -- “Son, it’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 06:57 pm |
|
NorthStar wrote: I deeply apologize for offending anyone. I of course was only speaking from my personal experience as Protestant, in which case, the word "most" is 100% accurate.
I don't think anyone was offended, but we (all) have to remember that our own personal experiences touch only a very small part of the whole. Evangelical Protestantism as practiced in the United States is not typical of the entire Protestant world, especially in places such as Germany and Scandinavia, just like our American style of Catholicism would be considered strange in many places in Africa, Latin America, and Asia, and the Eastern Catholic Church's Divine Liturgy would be a real culture shock to most Roman Catholics who don't even realize the other Catholic Churches exist.
There are a billion and a half Catholics and a few hundred million Protestants, and most of us will only come into contact with a tiny fraction of one percent, so it's hard to use terms like "most" based on our own personal experiences. None of us has even scratched the surface!
|
|
|
NorthStar
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 105 |
| First Name: | Chuck | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Roman Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 29th, 2008 05:37 pm |
|
Thanks everyone. I guess I should use the term "Fundamentalist" from now on, since that's where most of my protestant life was spent (but not all, as I had experience with Pentecostals, and non denominational as well, but have studied many other Protestant denominations in my journey to the Apostolic Churches, and I should know even Lutherans are different than other Lutherans..)...but no term is perfect I suppose. Anyways, thanks for understanding, and I will try to be more careful in the future.
|
|
|
Current time is 10:44 am | Page:   1 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
