Anabaptist
New Member
What gives you the impression that we're not interested in dialogue?
When people have no answer to the information you provide, they then start throwing out the accusations.
Last edited:
What gives you the impression that we're not interested in dialogue?
Hmmm...the Catholic Church did this, the Catholic Church did that. Ignoring, for instance, Radiants points that while wrong, it was just the unfortunate culture of the time.
The Catholic Church has done more good, as an institution, over the last 2000 years that any other.
You people need to stop telling us where you think we're wrong. Let us have our interpretation and explain it to you. You can have your opinion and explain it to us.
No, we addressed that. Has their been any recanting of these actions? The Bible tells us to repent of sin.
Anabaptist said:If I give my interpretation, you'll say I'm saying your wrong! You want us to agree with you. You want to teach and not be taught. The burden of proof is that you do not want dialogue.
Perhaps that is because you do not take what Catholics say about their own faith at face value and instead continue on with your preconceived notions.
If you will notice there are a lot of people (yourself included) who say what Catholics believe (and get a lot of it wrong) without even being Catholic.
Catholics are confident in their faith and you aren't going to convert anyone here.
You and the others are not interested in dialogue. You just want to tell us how wrong the Catholic Church is.
The same squawks, same rants, same bigotry.
It is like having a battle of the wits with unarmed people.
We consider them and refute them. Do you want us to simply agree?
What did we get wrong?
We are still commanded to not be silent to error.
As I am not (an never was) Catholic, I'm not really a good one to step in here but (if the Catholics don't mind) I'm getting a little tired of the Catholic bashing as well.
As I genuinely do not know, have all the Protestant Churches recanted their actions as well as the actions of their followers as many expect the Catholic Church to do?
There's my two cents, I don't really have more than two cents since (like I said) I'm not nor have I ever been Catholic. I'm just tired of the holier-than-thous
Anabaptist said:As I am not (an never was) Catholic, I'm not really a good one to step in here but (if the Catholics don't mind) I'm getting a little tired of the Catholic bashing as well.
I've tried to be respectful though I'm sure I was not completely successful. I have a tendency to get defensive. I've gone as far to say that I think some Catholics have a love-faith relationship with Jesus Christ. The part I fail to understand is why expressing what we believe to be Catholic theological errors labeled as "Catholic bashing?" We are open to have our beliefs brought into question.
As I genuinely do not know, have all the Protestant Churches recanted their actions as well as the actions of their followers as many expect the Catholic Church to do?
Probably not. To be fair, non-Catholics are too numerous to hold them all accountable for the ugly things that Protestants did during the reformation. There was an extremely violent sect of the Anabaptists during that time that destroyed the testimony of them all. The Anabaptist majority that taught nonviolence openly condemned the actions of that sect.
I realize the Catholics as individuals cannot control that their church has not recanted, but it's disheartening that so many are willing to sweep the past under a rug and ignore it.
There's my two cents, I don't really have more than two cents since (like I said) I'm not nor have I ever been Catholic. I'm just tired of the holier-than-thous
I'm not holier than thee, thy or thou!
And there is the fly in the ointment. You do not need to refute our beliefs, just state yours.
Don't tell us our beliefs have no basis in Scripture when we provide ample Scripture.
Again, the hubris to think you have a lock on all Truth.
Just all seems a little judgmental and hypocritical to me is all; one shouldn't judges based on assumptions nor on actions of others rather based on facts and those involved (and that goes for us non-Christians too).
When people have no answer to the information you provide, they then throwing out the accusations.
Therein lies the problem. You give false information about the Catholic Church and want us to provide answers. You provide answers to questions not information.
I guess my reasoning which could very well be faulty is this: If the Ku Klux Klan one day seemed to change and suddenly loved African Americans, I could not be a part of their group in good conscious knowing their past. In this case, you have a church that claims to be the one true church. It claims that the gates of hell will never prevail against it. Yet it has a history of unbiblical blood shedding and the church does not recant its actions. That does not sit well with me.[/QUOT
If you truly want to dialogue with Catholics, and understand Catholic doctrine, you will have to learn to separate the behaviors of individual Catholics, be they lay people, or bishops or popes, from the doctrines of the Church. The Doctrines are the only thing we believe are protected from error. The pope, as a man, is not infallible. Only in very limited circumstances are his teachings infallible.
Anabaptist said:Just all seems a little judgmental and hypocritical to me is all; one shouldn't judges based on assumptions nor on actions of others rather based on facts and those involved (and that goes for us non-Christians too).
I guess my reasoning which could very well be faulty is this: If the Ku Klux Klan one day seemed to change and suddenly loved African Americans, I could not be a part of their group in good conscious knowing their past. In this case, you have a church that claims to be the one true church. It claims that the gates of hell will never prevail against it. Yet it has a history of unbiblical blood shedding and the church does not recant its actions. That does not sit well with me.
Do you judge all Germans by the actions of the Third Reich?
If you truly want to dialogue with Catholics, and understand Catholic doctrine, you will have to learn to separate the behaviors of individual Catholics, be they lay people, or bishops or popes, from the doctrines of the Church. The Doctrines are the only thing we believe are protected from error. The pope, as a man, is not infallible. Only in very limited circumstances are his teachings infallible.
Anabaptist said:Do you judge all Germans by the actions of the Third Reich?
I'm of German lineage so I might not be the best person to ask, but I believe Germany has done a sufficient job at recanting their past.
I'm of German decent as well. My point is that you cannot judge one by the "sins of the father". I'd the Catholic Church were currently commuting those acts I would completely agree; but they're not and I'm sure Catholics in this forum would agree.
In what cases would the Pope be infallible?