How the (Catholic) Church Built Western Civilization

Zenit News Agency ^ | September 26, 2005

[HiTech RedNeck]

annalex sez:

Regarding specifically Spanish Jews, the Holy Inquisition concerned itself only with the dishonest Conversos, that is, precisely, Jewish converts to Christianity that secretly maintained their Jewish faith.

Well, you are going to have to answer to historical reports from the Jewish side of the fence that these "Conversos" (known in the Jewish world as "Marranos") were conversions of coercion fueled by anti-semitism. And now that they pleased their Catholic neighbors by acting Catholic, they get whipsawed from the other direction. It scarcely needs to be said that Jesus Christ never won a single soul that way.

[little jeremiah]

Moral Absolutes Ping.

Lively discussion; please skip over any sectarianist stuff... I agree more than 100% that people of different sects/monotheist religions should put aside their differences, realizing that the differences are much smaller than than agreements. If those who believe in God keep fighting with each other, guess who's happy?

Secularists/atheists/lefists/socialists/marxists/feminists/homosexualists etc etc. Nothing makes them as happy as sectarian or religious infighting.

Without faith in God and the sincere effort to follow His instructions, there would be no civilization. Not one we'd want to live in.

Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.

[HiTech RedNeck]

oh, you too

[d-back]

Safisoft, your ignorance of the Inquisition is astounding.

Since there was no such thing as the separation of Church and State in Spain during this time period--as in every time period but our own--the Church was concerned with supposed "converts" who had not really converted, but claimed to do so to obtain political benefits, which were limited by the Crown to those who were Catholic. Some of those fake converts were Jews (Marranos), some Muslims (Moriscos), and when their true religious allegiance was discovered, they lost their positions of power, they sometimes lost their property, and they sometimes lost their lives. It had taken the Catholic Spaniards five hundred years to remove the Moslem invaders and their collaborators of all religions from the Iberian peninsula, and the Crown and the Church dealt with fake converts with understandable seriousness.

If President Bush found out that one of his cabinet members had falsely taken his oath to support the Constitution of the United States, and had instead pledged allegiance to worldwide jihad, what would the US do? How do we treat those who would falsely pledge allegiance to our principles and assume positions of power? Removal from office, prison, death?

Damn right we have such penalites, and so did the Inquisition.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Oink

[ican'tbelieveit]

You know how the muslims and Israeli's have been fighting for a very, very long time? The Baptists and Catholics have been fighting for a very, very long time. Pre-protestant reformation period, a little persecution in those years.

[mike182d]

I agree more than 100% that people of different sects/monotheist religions should put aside their differences, realizing that the differences are much smaller than than agreements.

What exactly are you suggesting we set aside? If I mistakenly thought my wife was a secretary for a law firm but she really worked as a fashion designer, would it not be in my bests interests to know the truth? If I didn't care what was true about my wife, so long as I know she loved me, what kind of a marriage would that be? Rather, our love is only strengthened by the continual process of knowing more and more about what is true about the other's life and desires and wanting to share in them.

Why would the same not apply to one's love of God? If we are to truly love God it is imperative to know what is true about Him and an all-loving God would seek to reveal all that is true about Him so that we can grow into deeper union with each other.

To write off discussions over the nature of God and His plan for His people as "unimportant" or "irrelevant" is to claim that the nature of God or His will is not important or relevant. I would never say that to my wife, nor would I say that about God.

Although I suppose being content with all points of view allows one to avoid being challenged and having to think about their own beliefs.....and we can't have that now can we?

[mike182d]

The Baptists and Catholics have been fighting for a very, very long time. Pre-protestant reformation period, a little persecution in those years.

Do you have documentation of a "Baptist" Church existing independent of the Catholic Church prior to the Reformation?

[mike182d]

Kudos ;-)

[ican'tbelieveit]

Yes.

[mike182d]

May I see?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The Jesuits brought Western science all over the world. In the 20th century they so dominated the study of earthquakes that seismology became known as "the Jesuit science."

It's the Jesuits.

[ican'tbelieveit]

You can do research on it if you like. He asked why, I gave him the reason.

[GrandEagle]

still do not understand why some Baptists keep Catholics at arms length

I am Baptist, and I keep Catholics at "arms length"....Just long enough for a good hearty handshake.
I will have to disagree that our beliefs are 99% similar though. There are very significant differences in some very important details.
I have several friends who are very dedicated Catholics and have spoken at great length with them. I have found that many times the terms that we use have different meanings to us.
I have also found that, like Baptists, some are Catholics just because they don't know what else to be. I was discussing Salvation with a friend once who was Catholic and he actually said, and I quote, "I'm Catholic, we don't have anything like salvation in our church." I went on and tried to witness to him about the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ, but he would have nothing to do with it. I would not, however, form my view on Catholicism solely on our conversation though.
Another friend, who is Catholic, I was convinced believed that he was Saved because he did good works, and was good enough. After a very long discussion, I found that his faith is in the saving blood of Jesus Christ alone. We had some very significant terminology differences to get through though.

When I take a public stand on moral issues that effect my children, and my ability to teach them to study Gods word, I frequently look around and see nearly all Catholics who are standing with me.
While I understand many of the significant differences in our faith, I will continue to consider all who have accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior , my brother (or sister) in Christ. I will also continue try and help them "come to the knowledge of the truth" using Gods word as a guide, just as many Catholics do with me.

Just my two cents worth

Cordially,
GE

[little jeremiah]

I think you are mis-reading my intention. I am not suggesting that people of any faith should not persevere and increase their knowledge of and devotion to God.

I am just saying that vicious infighting between monotheists greatly please those who hate God and are busily attempting - with measurable success - to dismantle the basic religious foundations of human civilization.

Who is more dangerous to society - someone who believes in God but worships a little differently, on a different day, or in a different house of worship than you, or an atheist homosexual-promoting NAMBLA supporting ACLU activist who is trying to remove every reference to God in the public sphere?

I think the answer is pretty clear.

[GrandEagle]

Maybe your view could be summed up like this:
In my office there are eight of us who are followers of Christ. Two Baptist, one Pentecostal, two Catholic, two Assembly of God, and a Methodist.
We frequently discuss scripture and debate faiths, but no matter what the discussion, when one who does not know Jesus Christ as their Savior joins the discussion we only continue with the parts we agree on - the Saving power of Jesus Christ and Mans need of that Salvation.
In private, or at lunch alone, we can get pretty heated (in a Christ-like way), but never in public.

Cordially,
GE

[GrandEagle]

Maybe your view could be summed up like this:
In my office there are eight of us who are followers of Christ. Two Baptist, one Pentecostal, two Catholic, two Assembly of God, and a Methodist.
We frequently discuss scripture and debate faiths, but no matter what the discussion, when one who does not know Jesus Christ as their Savior joins the discussion we only continue with the parts we agree on - the Saving power of Jesus Christ and Mans need of that Salvation.
In private, or at lunch alone, we can get pretty heated (in a Christ-like way), but never in public.

Cordially,
GE

[kidd]

Yes, I'll agree that the terminology is a real stumbling block for both Baptists and Catholics. I've learned that Baptist Grace = Catholic Works + Catholic Faith + Catholic Grace.

However when you find a knowledgable, practicing, patient Catholic, you'll find that John 3:16 is pretty central to both faiths and that everything else is either a difference in terminology or procedure.

[Tao Yin]

So Clement laid the foundation for the Papacy. This is exactly my point. Here is the start of the circular logic. After you unwind all of the layers, you end up with one man writing a letter that was rejected from the canon.

Two interesting things about 1 Clement. First, it claims inspiration (1 Clem 63:2). Second it speaks of the phoenix in Arabia as a real bird (1 Clem 25).

1 Clement is not canon for good reason.

[annalex]

conversions of coercion fueled by anti-semitism.

Conversion of coercion is not a good thing and was never encouraged by the Church, at least not doctrinally. I am sure abuse happened and I realize that many Jews never converted in their hearts, and that presented a problem for everyone around.

My advice to everyone contemplating conversion to Catholicism, do not do it for extraneous reasons, even under great duress as it won't help your soul.

It is also true that the Catholic Church would make an exception during WWII and accept converts without asking questions, if that helped save lives. But this was done when emigration was not an option. I don't know if the similar consideration was made during the Reconquest of Spain, and what the position of the Holy Inquisition was when a conversion was confessed to be one of duress.