Catholic Q & A

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
821

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

Pat, I don’t consider you fundamentalist at all, and in fact consider you to be more Christian, in the truest sense of the word, than most other believers in this forum.

My point though, is that I have no way of knowing you’re right and Tiribulus is wrong. I believe your interpretations of scripture are correct, based on my own reading of the bible, but I can’t even assume the bible is correct or that there is a god. And I see significant differences in core beliefs even among Catholics, like you and Chris.

I just don’t see any way to claim I know something is actually true, based on faith. I don’t trust faith because I can see how it leads people to such opposite conclusions.[/quote]

There is a full proof way as Jesus stated, you can tell a tree by it’s fruit. If the fruit is rotten so is the tree. Second, there it must past the secular test. Truth is true no matter what, if it’s true in faith is must also be true in secularism. For instance, the Golden Rule vs. Dale Carnegie. What do they teach? Basically if you want respect, you first have to give it. This is true whether in a religious context or not.

Further, between me, Brother Chris, Sloth, Cortes or any other practicing Catholic there is NO difference in our core beliefs. We may have slight disagreements on some not dogmatic semantics, but the core it 100% solid. The church is flexible in that manner, we don’t have to always agree so long as the core is solid.

I hope you can reconcile this stuff one day. The talent you have with scripture is to precious to waste.[/quote]

I hear what you’re saying, but as the religious debates here illustrate, one man’s fruit is another man’s feces :wink: It’s not surprising that Catholics share the same core beliefs, but what about Calvinists, Methodists, Baptists, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Hindus, and Muslims? It all comes down to faith, and I see no objective means for determining who is right and who is wrong.

I do agree with Jefferson that Jesus was a great man, a wise teacher, and that the world would be far better off if people followed the basic principles of his message on how to treat one another.[/quote]

I agree with Jefferson too. He believed that miracles and divinity were not necessary for belief in God, but it is His creation itself that speaks about him. But most people aren’t as intelligent as Jefferson and they do need miracles and divinity to witness to them. Besides all of Jefferson’s wisdom, he was very, very flawed.

Now, I wrote a bunch of stuff but it some how got erased. Anyhow, there are two commandments above all in scripture, love of God and love of neighbor. You want to know which religions are right? The ones who preach those commandments as the most important…Those who do not are false. Those who judge as if God, those who shut the kingdom of God from others are false. Therefore, it does not matter if you are Jew, Muslim, Christian or Hindu, etc. Do this and you will live, that’s what is taught. If this is your focus in faith, we are one in Christ.
Oh wait, Jesus said that no one can come to the father, but through him! Correct. He is the judge and advocate, but not all know his name. You know who knows Christ?
“Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.”(Matthew 25:40 ESV) ← This is who knows Christ, those who do this.
This is what it means to be Catholic. You do this and let God do the rest.[/quote]

Good post. No doubt Tiribulus is frothing as I type, ready to call down god’s fiery wrath on us for daring to believe such heresy, but I couldn’t agree more. Jefferson didn’t believe in the divinity or miracles of Jesus, but he called himself a Christian. Why? Because he believed the principles that Jesus taught, and tried to follow them in his life. How well he succeeded in doing so is not for me to judge.

Jesus taught people to love one another. That is the unifying principle across all moral systems, religious or otherwise. People would do well if they spent their lives loving others, rather than judging, discriminating, and killing others for being different from them.

822

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Catholics going to run this country – we’re becoming more Hispanic every day, the SCOTUS is 6/9 Catholics, and my son tells me that something like have of all the Mids at Annapolis are Catholics.

Maybe then some MORALITY can be brought back to this country.[/quote]

Or some damn good land scaping.[/quote]

Nah, you need the gays for that.

823

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.

824

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?

825

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

Eh, I’ll let someone. I didn’t really want to contribute to defending the Catholic on PWI. It was the escalating nastiness which got me to say anything at all.

826

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Catholics going to run this country – we’re becoming more Hispanic every day, the SCOTUS is 6/9 Catholics, and my son tells me that something like have of all the Mids at Annapolis are Catholics.

Maybe then some MORALITY can be brought back to this country.[/quote]

Hopefully. http://catholicism.org/category/catholic-america

827

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

[quote]Catholic Encyclopedia wrote:
Ignorance is said to be invincible when a person is unable to rid himself of it notwithstanding the employment of moral diligence, that is, such as under the circumstances is, morally speaking, possible and obligatory. This manifestly includes the states of inadvertence, forgetfulness, etc. Such ignorance is obviously involuntary and therefore not imputable.[/quote]

828

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
Anyway, here is my response to the other part of your comment:

Is God present in all possibilities simultaneously, or is time a line in which he exists in its entirety? In other words, is there another dimension (so to speak) where I went to the left side in which God also exists?[/quote]

Well it matters, there is no revelation, but there is speculation on there being dimensions. However, if there were other dimensions God would be present in those, as well.

God is omnipresent because what one creates he is master of and not subject to. God created the universe and is not subject to space or time as space and time exist only within the universe.
[/quote]

Interesting. Thank you for your time, Chris.[/quote]

No problem, sir.

829

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

Eh, I’ll let someone. I didn’t really want to contribute to defending the Catholic on PWI. It was the escalating nastiness which got me to say anything at all. [/quote]
I can understand, even though I am not a catholic I have witnessed plenty of ad hominems, straw men and outright false lies made against it made by so call Christians who are suppose to be lovers of truth.

The most outrageous example I have heard was at a prophecy seminar where they said that somewhere to 10-50 million Christians died in the Inquisition; as soon as I heard this I had to look up sources and found none for this claim only to find out that less than five thousand people were killed over hundreds of years in both Inquisitions combined.

You also handled yourself pretty well against that guy who kept trying to say that the new testament was influenced by the mystic religions(if I remember correctly).

830

[quote]Sloth wrote:<<< If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote] [quote]Sloth wrote:<<< Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. >>>[/quote]Hence one of my five favorite people here ever. I respect this stance infinitely more than this kissy face open armed neo ecumenism wherein even a stiff necked schismatic apostate like me skates through life under saving grace on their way to heaven. My hat is hereby very sincerely tipped. You once told me you believed me when I said that I had genuine affection for the Catholics here despite my hatred for that church. I really hope you still do.

831

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

[quote]Catholic Encyclopedia wrote:
Ignorance is said to be invincible when a person is unable to rid himself of it notwithstanding the employment of moral diligence, that is, such as under the circumstances is, morally speaking, possible and obligatory. This manifestly includes the states of inadvertence, forgetfulness, etc. Such ignorance is obviously involuntary and therefore not imputable.[/quote][/quote]
Okay I see that ignorance is said to be invincible according to that definition but what are the implications of invincible ignorance.

832

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You once told me you believed me when I said that I had genuine affection for the Catholics here despite my hatred for that church. I really hope you still do.

[/quote]

I do, because I understand. I believe no less than you, but as a Catholic. My Catholicism isn’t simply the most comfortable shirt I could find at the new age feel-goody spiritualist store. I’m not concerned with making outsiders feel like they’ve a shot to make it through the gates alongside me (if even I do). Mine is a church that teaches salvation, AND the very real threat of damnation. It’s not simply a purty building to go get my spirituality on. An arbitrary choice, or an interchangeable system. The road is indeed narrow, in my world.

What I caution BOTH sides (not just you Tirib), of what turned into a nasty debate, is to put a filter on the language. Most know each other’s objections, now let’s respect our friends. You say I follow heretical beliefs? What a shocker. I say the same about you. There too, what a shocker, right?. Great, we know where we stand. So what do you think about the GoP candidates? Just using you as an example, as it obviously goes both ways. When the teaching becomes nothing more than ridicule and abrasive, it’s time to knock the dust off the sandals and move on.

I respect everyone of the individuals involved here (though I may vehemently disagree). Otherwise, I might not risk taking a punch stepping in between you combatants.

833

I actually sent you to this article 7 or 8 months ago. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ignorance

[quote]Invincible ignorance, whether of the law or of the fact, is always a valid excuse and excludes sin. The evident reason is that neither this state nor the act resulting therefrom is voluntary. It is undeniable that a man cannot be invincibly ignorant of the natural law, so far as its first principles are concerned, and the inferences easily drawn therefrom. This, however, according to the teaching of St. Thomas, is not true of those remoter conclusions, which are deducible only by a process of laborious and sometimes intricate reasoning. Of these a person may be invincibly ignorant. Even when the invincible ignorance is concomitant, it prevents the act which it accompanies from being regarded as sinful. The perverse temper of soul, which in this case is supposed, retains, of course, such malice as it had. Vincible ignorance, being in some way voluntary, does not permit a man to escape responsibility for the moral deformity of his deeds; he is held to be guilty and in general the more guilty in proportion as his ignorance is more voluntary. Hence, the essential thing to remember is that the guilt of an act performed or omitted in vincible ignorance is not to be measured by the intrinsic malice of the thing done or omitted so much as by the degree of negligence discernible in the act.

It must not be forgotten that, although vincible ignorance leaves the culpability of a person intact, still it does make the act less voluntary than if it were done with full knowledge. This holds good except perhaps with regard to the sort of ignorance termed affected. Here theologians are not agreed as to whether it increases or diminishes a man’s moral liability. The solution is possibly to be had from a consideration of the motive which influences one in choosing purposely to be ignorant. For instance, a man who would refuse to learn the doctrines of the Church from a fear that he would thus find himself compelled to embrace them would certainly be in a bad plight. Still he would be less guilty than the man whose neglect to know the teachings of the Church was inspired by sheer scorn of her authority. Invincible ignorance, whether of the law or fact, exempts one from the penalty which may have been provided by positive legislation. Even vincible ignorance, either of the law or fact, which is not crass, excuses one from the punishment. Mere lack of knowledge of the sanction does not free one from the penalty except in cases of censures. It is true then that any sort of ignorance which is not itself grievously sinful excuses, because for the incurring of censures contumacy is required. Vincible and consequent ignorance about the duties of our state of life or the truths of faith necessary for salvation is, of course, sinful. Ignorance of the nature or effects of an act does not make it invalid if everything else requisite for its validity be present. For instance, one who knows nothing of the efficacy of baptism validly baptizes, provided that he employs the matter and form and has the intention of doing what the Church does.[/quote]

834

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

Eh, I’ll let someone. I didn’t really want to contribute to defending the Catholic on PWI. It was the escalating nastiness which got me to say anything at all. [/quote]
I can understand, even though I am not a catholic I have witnessed plenty of ad hominems, straw men and outright false lies made against it made by so call Christians who are suppose to be lovers of truth.

The most outrageous example I have heard was at a prophecy seminar where they said that somewhere to 10-50 million Christians died in the Inquisition; as soon as I heard this I had to look up sources and found none for this claim only to find out that less than five thousand people were killed over hundreds of years in both Inquisitions combined.

You also handled yourself pretty well against that guy who kept trying to say that the new testament was influenced by the mystic religions(if I remember correctly).[/quote]

Thanks, I didn’t mean to come off as dismissive. Heh, and yeah I remember that thread. In the end it got narrowed down to something like “Well, well, Christianity just took from the Hebrew faith!” Noooo, you don’t say?!

835

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I actually sent you to this article 7 or 8 months ago. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ignorance
[/quote]

This one, too.

836

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

[quote]Catholic Encyclopedia wrote:
Ignorance is said to be invincible when a person is unable to rid himself of it notwithstanding the employment of moral diligence, that is, such as under the circumstances is, morally speaking, possible and obligatory. This manifestly includes the states of inadvertence, forgetfulness, etc. Such ignorance is obviously involuntary and therefore not imputable.[/quote][/quote]
Okay I see that ignorance is said to be invincible according to that definition but what are the implications of invincible ignorance.[/quote]

Nothing by itself, I am sure there are many people that are invincibly ignorant. You still have to follow the law written on your heart and seek after God’s heart. If you sin you have to repent with a perfectly contrite heart for those sins which is difficult to do.

Invincible ignorance is understood as all men have the law written on their hearts. As well, realistically not all people have heard God’s Commandments. So, unlike some who expect every person in the world to read the Bible (when many in on this rock could and can not read) and then profess some formulaic words (which are not in the Bible) in order to receive absolute assurance of their salvation (which I still haven’t found in the Bible), we understand that some will (against our best efforts) not hear the Word of God in their life time. So, we have hope because of God’s mercy that if they obey the law that is written on their hearts and have a perfectly contrite heart for their sins upon their death that they will go to Heaven.

However, this is the most hopeful of hopeful situations. Could there be many who have fit into this category? Yeah, but it is speculation. More realistically, not many will be able to. Therefore, in the current age the Church still is fit with the mission of spreading the Word of God and placing pastors of good will and faith to heal the sick and forgive the sins of others.

837

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

Eh, I’ll let someone. I didn’t really want to contribute to defending the Catholic on PWI. It was the escalating nastiness which got me to say anything at all. [/quote]

Oh it hadn’t gotten nasty yet :slight_smile:

838

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Besides, how do you know you are right?[/quote]

Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. If that upsets them, their emotional fragility is not my concern. After all, I’ve never lost a wink of sleep simply because Jews, or Hindus, or atheists think I’m wrong. I’m too emotionally mature for that. My Catholicism isn’t akin to having a favorite shirt that seems to just fit the best. I don’t bend it to make people like me, or feel better about being around me. If they can’t handle it, life goes on. I don’t care enough about them being wrong to get caught up in an escalating session name-calling.[/quote]

"Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. "
LOL! Now that is a bold statement my friend. I disagree because there are to many variables involved and I do know my faithful studious people who have come to follow a different path.
[/quote]

If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote]
I admit I haven’t been reading this thread as much as I should have since I have questions as well which I wish to reserve for a later time but what is invincible ignorance?[/quote]

Eh, I’ll let someone. I didn’t really want to contribute to defending the Catholic on PWI. It was the escalating nastiness which got me to say anything at all. [/quote]
I can understand, even though I am not a catholic I have witnessed plenty of ad hominems, straw men and outright false lies made against it made by so call Christians who are suppose to be lovers of truth.

The most outrageous example I have heard was at a prophecy seminar where they said that somewhere to 10-50 million Christians died in the Inquisition; as soon as I heard this I had to look up sources and found none for this claim only to find out that less than five thousand people were killed over hundreds of years in both Inquisitions combined.

You also handled yourself pretty well against that guy who kept trying to say that the new testament was influenced by the mystic religions(if I remember correctly).[/quote]

And further truth about the Spanish Inquisition is that once Pope Sixtus found out about what Ferdinand and Isabelle were up to, he spoke out against it as it was not the intention if inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition was more political as being the end of the 100 year war, the king and queen thought the best way to get rid of enemies of state was to faorce conversion or die. As long as you were Catholic, you were not an enemy of Spain.
Why did the church do more about it? Their hand were tied. The Spanish army was assisting in battling the Moors in the east in Turkey. With out the formidable Spanish military, much of Europe would be under Arab control and Islam would be the main religion.
Politics, is the word of the day.

839

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:<<< If they’ve studied, and chose to follow an incorrect path, there isn’t even invincible ignorance of baptism and Christ.[/quote] [quote]Sloth wrote:<<< Faith, my reading, my reasoning, and personal revelation. If someone says as much and arrives at a different faith, they’re either wrong or lying. >>>[/quote]Hence one of my five favorite people here ever. I respect this stance infinitely more than this kissy face open armed neo ecumenism wherein even a stiff necked schismatic apostate like me skates through life under saving grace on their way to heaven. My hat is hereby very sincerely tipped. You once told me you believed me when I said that I had genuine affection for the Catholics here despite my hatred for that church. I really hope you still do.
[/quote]
There is nothing ‘neo’ about ecumenism. It is the stance of the Church and the law of the Gospel, that we are one body in Christ. If you choose to be the enemy of the body of Christ, it is your own decision.
Second, don’t think I don’t recognize you taking cheap shots at me with your ‘kissy face’ barb. You don’t have to mention my name for me to know who you meant. Sorry if you avoid the truth that is so blatantly laid out before you in scripture. You elevate an interpretation of scripture over the scriptures themselves. Wake UP!

Last, you cannot hate the church and love the people. The people are the church, doofus. We have tried to explain that to you a million times. We the people are the church…You can blow up the Vatican, you still have one Holy and Apostolic church. This isn’t like Iran where you can hate the government and like the people for they are oppressed not of their own freewill. We have a choice and we choose the RCC, and we are the church. Therefore, you cannot hate the church with out hating Catholics themselves.
Hate is not a Christian tenet. Look where it has gotten you. Has hating us(the church) made you happy? Has it done any good what so ever? I’d say no, it has only brought you unhappiness. There’s your sign.

840

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You once told me you believed me when I said that I had genuine affection for the Catholics here despite my hatred for that church. I really hope you still do.

[/quote]

I do, because I understand. I believe no less than you, but as a Catholic. My Catholicism isn’t simply the most comfortable shirt I could find at the new age feel-goody spiritualist store. I’m not concerned with making outsiders feel like they’ve a shot to make it through the gates alongside me (if even I do). Mine is a church that teaches salvation, AND the very real threat of damnation. It’s not simply a purty building to go get my spirituality on. An arbitrary choice, or an interchangeable system. The road is indeed narrow, in my world.

What I caution BOTH sides (not just you Tirib), of what turned into a nasty debate, is to put a filter on the language. Most know each other’s objections, now let’s respect our friends. You say I follow heretical beliefs? What a shocker. I say the same about you. There too, what a shocker, right?. Great, we know where we stand. So what do you think about the GoP candidates? Just using you as an example, as it obviously goes both ways. When the teaching becomes nothing more than ridicule and abrasive, it’s time to knock the dust off the sandals and move on.

I respect everyone of the individuals involved here (though I may vehemently disagree). Otherwise, I might not risk taking a punch stepping in between you combatants.
[/quote]

Our duties as Catholics is, when invited, to lead people to Christ. Again, I say when invited or asked. This thread is dedicated to such a topic. We are asked and we answer. When attacked we must defend. How can we get the Good News out if we allow people to poison the wells? If we say that vicious attacks against us are as mutually respectable? That makes no sense. If you think this just arbitrarily devolved in the tit-for-tat, then you have not read enough.

If I am answering someones question, and somebody else interjects attacking everything I answered to another person, I am supposed to regard those attacks as equal to my answer? I dare say hell no. I must and I will defend myself and my church, and if I have to get nasty to do it, then I will.
You’re not my daddy or my moralist.

I know what it may look like, but I don’t care. I don’t see the point of putting on a dishonest front so we look better. Christians fight and get nasty too, just like everybody else. That’s the truth. Doesn’t mean we do not need to check ourselves, but it doesn’t also mean we accept and tolerate lies being told about us (catholics) or anybody else. I am not going to let the word of somebody who hates us stand as the truth about us.
That’s what I call being ‘kissy faced’, allowing our enemies to speak against us viciously with out defending it and replacing it with their own lies.

Being Catholic isn’t a spectator sport, either. We, again when invited, are to spread the word of Christ. First, Christ, then if said outsider so desires, the Church. If the Body of Christ rejects ‘outsiders’ then it’s more likely the outsiders will reject Christ.

All of this is in the Catechism, I am not stepping a single toe out of line…