CivGeneral's Catholicism Thread

[ironduck]

Well if the catholics cannot even agree on when something is ex cathedra..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabus_of_Errors#Reactions_of_Catholics

 

[Inqvisitor]

Well if the catholics cannot even agree on when something is ex cathedra..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabus_of_Errors#Reactions_of_Catholics

Advice: When finding out the Catholic position do not use secular sources especially not Wikipedia.

What the Catholic Encyclopedia has to say...
The binding power of the Syllabus of Pius IX is differently explained by Catholic theologians. All are of the opinion that many of the propositions are condemned if not in the Syllabus, then certainly in other final decisions of the infallible teaching authority of the Church, for instance in the Encyclical "Quanta Cura". There is no agreement, however, on the question whether each thesis condemned in the Syllabus is infallibly false, merely because it is condemned in the Syllabus. Many theologians are of the opinion that to the Syllabus as such an infallible teaching authority is to be ascribed, whether due to an ex-cathedra decision by the pope or to the subsequent acceptance by the Church. Others question this. So long as Rome has not decided the question, everyone is free to follow the opinion he chooses. Even should the condemnation of many propositions not possess that unchangeableness peculiar to infallible decisions, nevertheless the binding force of the condemnation in regard to all the propositions is beyond doubt. For the Syllabus, as appears from the official communication of Cardinal Antonelli, is a decision given by the pope speaking as universal teacher and judge to Catholics the world over. All Catholics, therefore, are bound to accept the Syllabus. Exteriorly they may neither in word nor in writing oppose its contents; they must also assent to it interiorly.

 

[ironduck]

For outsiders it makes a lot more sense to seek a secular source on matters of religious infighting. You quote the sources that agree with you while I quote sources that show conflicting viewpoints. And this thread clearly shows conflicting viewpoints among catholics.

 

[Inqvisitor]

For outsiders it makes a lot more sense to seek a secular source on matters of religious infighting. You quote the sources that agree with you while I quote sources that show conflicting viewpoints. And this thread clearly shows conflicting viewpoints among catholics.

I quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia on Catholic matters...you quote from a "wiki" anyone can edit owned by atheists and Jews.

 

[GenMarshall]

I would like to point out that the Syllabus of Errors is a very controversial document back then after the American Civil War (Since the document was written in 1864) and even today.

15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.

Why is it considered an error to embrace and profess a religion? Even if that person has been guided by "the light of reason" into (convert) or back into (revert) the Catholic Church?

18. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church.

I would disagree with that statement. Eventhough that Protestantism is not the true Christian religion that I see it. But Protestantism is a Christian denomonation in my view.

The syllabus of Errors has no meaning in the United States since we ignored them. Not because we dont see it as irrelivent, but because Catholics are a minority in a Protestant majority nation and have to conform with the majority or risk persecution or anti-Catholic violance against Catholics.

The thing you need to understand Inqvisitor is that American Catholics have endured many issues of anti-Catholicism. Irish Catholics have been persecuted and discriminated against by the Protestant majority. Discrimination against the Irish immigrants led them to seek assimilation into U.S. culture. At the time the Catholic church in the United States was divided along ethnic lines, so that Irish Catholics had Irish bishops, Germans had German bishops, etc.

If you also look further into American History right down to the American Revolution to the creation of the first amendment which gave everyone in the United States the freedom to practace their own religion and prohibits an establishment of a state religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" - First Amendment of the Consitution of the United States.

Many people during colonial America came here for religious freedom for England has a state religion and persecuted anyone who does not conform to the religion of the King of England. Catholics settled in Maryland, Puritans settled in Mass, Quakers in Pennsylvania, etc. The thing to understand that Separation of Church and State and Freedom of Religion are an important rights. We wanted to ensure that American Citizens has a right to worship whatever they please and we wanted to ensure that Religion does not get entangled with a secular government.

For me, I dont consider freedom of religion and separation of church and state heresy, I consider it a blessing. If the United States had a state religion say Anglican/Episcopal and forbade the freedom of religion and I was Catholic, you know that I would be persecuted in a heartbeat by the Anglican/Episcopal majority as well as practitioners of Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

I quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia on Catholic matters...you quote from a "wiki" anyone can edit owned by atheists and Jews.

FYI, Wikipedia maintains a neutral point of view when posting/editing articles which it is Wikipedia's offical policy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

 

[ironduck]

I quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia on Catholic matters...you quote from a "wiki" anyone can edit owned by atheists and Jews.

Ah, yes.. the damn Jews. They always get in the way, don't they?

 

[Inqvisitor]

I would like to point out that the Syllabus of Errors is a very controversial document back then after the American Civil War (Since the document was written in 1864) and even today.

The Church has always been controversial, a contradiction to the world.

Why is it considered an error to embrace and profess a religion? Even if that person has been guided by "the light of reason" into (convert) or back into (revert) the Catholic Church?

The Catholic Church teaches that Catholicism is the one true faith which people must adhere to.

I would disagree with that statement. Eventhough that Protestantism is not the true Christian religion that I see it. But Protestantism is a Christian denomonation in my view.

You disagree with infallible condemnations of the pope?

The syllabus of Errors has no meaning in the United States since we ignored them. Not because we dont see it as irrelivent, but because Catholics are a minority in a Protestant majority nation and have to conform with the majority or risk persecution or anti-Catholic violance against Catholics.

The thing you need to understand Inqvisitor is that American Catholics have endured many issues of anti-Catholicism. Irish Catholics have been persecuted and discriminated against by the Protestant majority. Discrimination against the Irish immigrants led them to seek assimilation into U.S. culture. At the time the Catholic church in the United States was divided along ethnic lines, so that Irish Catholics had Irish bishops, Germans had German bishops, etc.

No, it has very much meaning in the United States. People who deny Catholic dogmas are called Americanists, and Americanism is condemned by Pope Leo XIII. Is this you speaking, or are you just quoting Wikipedia here?

That other "discriminated against" stuff is a load of rubbish and you know it. Christians went to the lions in ancient Rome.

If you also look further into American History right down to the American Revolution to the creation of the first amendment which gave everyone in the United States the freedom to practace their own religion and prohibits an establishment of a state religion.

And that idea is condemned. By Rome. To which Catholics the world over are loyal.

FYI, Wikipedia maintains a neutral point of view when posting/editing articles which it is Wikipedia's offical policy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

FYI, Wikipedia maintains an anti-Catholic and anti-Western point of view when posting/editing articles.

 

[GenMarshall]

You disagree with infallible condemnations of the pope?

I only disagree with only parts of the condemnations of the pope.

No, it has very much meaning in the United States. People who deny Catholic dogmas are called Americanists, and Americanism is condemned by Pope Leo XIII. Is this you speaking, or are you just quoting Wikipedia here?

And have Catholics be discriminated and persecuted in a Protestant majority nation?

That other "discriminated against" stuff is a load of rubbish and you know it. Christians went to the lions in ancient Rome.

I take it youre from a nation where the state religion is Catholicism with no histories of other religions discriminating against Catholics. Discrimination is most certanly not rubbish and is a reality back then and it is still a reality. I know my American History and for a fact, Catholics have been discriminated against back when the Irish Catholics came here to right now with the Klu Klux Klan. The KKK are very anti-Catholic. Not only do the KKK kill African-Americans, they also killed and persecuted Jews and Catholics.

These views were exported to the United States. John Jay in 1788 promoted the New York legislature to require officeholders to renounce foreign authorities "in all matters ecclesiastical as well as civil.". More significant anti-Catholicism has historically been conspicuous among the beliefs of various nativist organisations from the Know-Nothing Party in the 1850s to the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s. The case of the murder of Father James Coyle had more to do with racial issues, but is a prime example of anti-Catholic violence in the US.

In 1846 the U.S. went to war with Catholic Mexico, but this did not produce anti-Catholicism. Hinkley explains this by the force of American nationalism, the general tolerance of religion, and the fact that most anti-Catholics were also anti-war. In more recent years, suspicion of the political aims and agenda of the Catholic Church have been revived several times. In 1949, Paul Blanshard's book American Freedom and Catholic Power portrayed the Catholic Church as an anti-democratic force hostile to freedom of speech and religion, eager to impose itself on the United States by boycott and subterfuge. These accusations continue to garner support because of the Catholic hierarchy's alliance with the right to life groups and threats to withhold Eucharist from Catholics who vote in favor of actions deemed opposed to Church teaching, such as abortion, assisted suicide or same-sex marriage.

It bears mention that this is not precisely excommunication. Few excommunications of political figures have occurred in modern times[2]. The confirmed cases of excommunicated Catholic politicians were primarily Communists or military dictators. Added to that according to Catholic teaching those in a state of mortal sin should not receive the Eucharist, which Catholicism considers a biblical rule that is not specific to any occupation.

The most recent Gallup states that 30% of Americans have an unfavorable view of the Catholic faith with 57% having a favorable view. This is a higher unfavorability rate then in 2000, but considerably better than in 2002. Those who are not Christian or irreligious had a majority with an unfavorable view, but in part this represented a negative view toward al Christianity. The Catholic Church's doctrines, the priest sex abuse scandal, and "idolizing saints" were top issues for those who disapproved. On the other hand greed, Catholicism's view on homosexuality, and the celibate priesthood were low on the list of grievances for those who held an unfavorable view of Catholicism.
Sorce

And that idea is condemned. By Rome. To which Catholics the world over are loyal.

It should not be condemned, it should be embraceded. Think about it, Freedom of Religion and Separation of Church and State is a blessing, not a curse. How would you feel if you were that Arab Convert to Christianity who was persecuted by the Muslim Community and the Taliban? You would most certanly appreciate the gifts of Freedom of Religion and Separation from Church and State.

FYI, Wikipedia maintains an anti-Catholic and anti-Western point of view when posting/editing articles.

Show me in their policy that they have an anti-Catholic and anti-Western POV? :crasyeye:.

 

[Inqvisitor]

I only disagree with only parts of the condemnations of the pope.

So partial heretic?

And have Catholics be discriminated and persecuted in a Protestant majority nation?

More on and on with the nonsense...CHRISTIANS WENT TO THE LIONS

It should not be condemned, it should be embraceded. Think about it, Freedom of Religion and Separation of Church and State is a blessing, not a curse. How would you feel if you were that Arab Convert to Christianity who was persecuted by the Muslim Community and the Taliban? You would most certanly appreciate the gifts of Freedom of Religion and Separation from Church and State.

No, I pray for the conversion of the Mohammedans to the one true faith or else they are all going to Hell. Religious freedom is insanity.

Show me in their policy that they have an anti-Catholic and anti-Western POV? :crasyeye:.

Case in point, their critical article on the Syllabus.

 

[GenMarshall]

So partial heretic?

Nope

More on and on with the nonsense...CHRISTIANS WENT TO THE LIONS

Well dont come crying to me when you are suddenly discriminated and persecuted by Protestant Christians just because youre Catholic

No, I pray for the conversion of the Mohammedans to the one true faith or else they are all going to Hell. Religious freedom is insanity.

Who left you incharge of the pearly gates of heaven? . We are not the ones who should be judging who is going to heaven and hell.

As for the religious freedom argument, I am going to start a new thread on that topic.

 

[Inqvisitor]

Well dont come crying to me when you are suddenly discriminated and persecuted by Protestant Christians just because youre Catholic

I must say I don't recall ever doing that...

Who left you incharge of the pearly gates of heaven? . We are not the ones who should be judging who is going to heaven and hell.

St. Peter will be waiting at the gates...and you know what he said in Acts iv. 12...

 

[aussieboy]

It's interesting to see how the catholics (self proclaimed, I don't care if they are actual catholics) fight over who is in the proper club instead of noting what Inqvisitor is really fighting:

Freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of speech.

Don't worry, ironduck, we haven't forgotten. That is why I fight him.

 

[bhsup]

God shall judge them, but the Roman Pontiff is the voice of St. Peter whose role is to guard the Sacred Deposit of the Faith against heresies.

IF you had stopped after your first four words there, I would have been just fine with what you said, but you kept going. As I've oft repeated, few things scare me more than humans having the audacity to go throwing that heresy word around and thinking any human can know the heart of a man. God truly knows the heart of any man, no mortal man does, and only God can judge a man on a spiritual level.

 

[aussieboy]

IF you had stopped after your first four words there, I would have been just fine with what you said, but you kept going. As I've oft repeated, few things scare me more than humans having the audacity to go throwing that heresy word around and thinking any human can know the heart of a man. God truly knows the heart of any man, no mortal man does, and only God can judge a man on a spiritual level.

Well, I have to admit that's the Pope's job, my friend, as much as Catholics are concerned.

 

[bhsup]

Well, I have to admit that's the Pope's job, my friend, as much as Catholics are concerned.

No no, I understand that. I actually don't have a whole lot of sympathy for Catholics who gripe about the rules of the Catholic church. If you wanna be one, do what the Church says or leave. As long as leaving is an option...

What frightens me about Inqvistor is that he really seems, at least I get this impression from his post, that he'd probably be for forced conversions at pain of death if refused, and so forth. That type of attitude scares me silly.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

i always thought the pope was just a teacher, not the principal

 

[Mr. Dictator]

What frightens me about Inqvistor is that he really seems, at least I get this impression from his post, that he'd probably be for forced conversions at pain of death if refused, and so forth. That type of attitude scares me silly.

you mean like a GASP Inqvisition?!??!

shocking

 

[Heretic_Cata]

What frightens me about Inqvistor is that he really seems, at least I get this impression from his post, that he'd probably be for forced conversions at pain of death if refused, and so forth.

I admire that about him.

 

[classical_hero]

Just remove the hyphen at the end.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm

It is good to see that the link you used is calling the Roman catholic Church, The Great Harlot. After all this is one of the reasonings used to say that Peter went to Rome.

 

[Inqvisitor]

It is good to see that the link you used is calling the Roman catholic Church, The Great Harlot. After all this is one of the reasonings used to say that Peter went to Rome.

And making up complete lies supports your argument how...?