Posted on 03/14/2007 6:37:02 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
And 'round and 'round it goes.
This dispute began over the proper appellation of the self-styled "Praise Tabernacle Church", an independent ecclesial community of indeterminate theology and indeterminate origin. I labeled them "protestant", for which I have been excoriated. I have, several times, on two separate threads, asked for clarification on the matter: what is the correct epithet for such communities? If not "protestant", what? I have, as yet, received no answer.
I have repeatedly requested suggestions as to an alternative for "protestant" that is applicable to independent ecclesial communities of indeterminate theology and indeterminate origin. I will be perfectly happy to use such alternative if it is ever offered. Any implication that I am not open to constructive correction on this matter constitutes false witness.
In 33, ArrogantBustard says he's been begging you to heed that "excellent suggestion".
As you know, I do quite a bit of Protestant-on-Catholic dialog. The battle tends to be all on Catholic turf: why Mary, why Pope, why the Saints, why confession, etc. In the Catholic apologetics business, you all look alike to me. So, don't expect a Catholic to sort your distinctions out, especially when you collectively and in unified front busy yourselves with what the Catholics think and do.
I beg to differ with you here. How many times have non-Catholics derided the Catholic priest who might have been arrested.
Thin skin this morning? Or are you trying to make a point -- that you are anti-Catholic?
Perhaps I should call them the "blitiri". It's a made-up word, so it means exactly what I say it means; neither more nor less. How can anyone possibly take offense?
Great response!
For some reason, NO MATTER WHAT THE ORIGINAL TOPIC, "why Mary" always seems to get brought up.
"In essence she is saying that rejection of those who hold Catholic beliefs does not constitute anti-Catholicism because she and others do not reject Catholic people who do not hold Catholic beliefs. In other words, the only good Catholic is a non-believing Catholic."
This is a problem we all face when we maintain a big tent, but don't discipline the members. The world will always cull out those that stand against its values using perjorative terms as "extremists" or "fundamentalists" and until the church separates itself from the world lovers, the world will always claim its friends as the true church and the faithful as the aberrant ones. That is one of the reasons that there are many denominations and Independant churches. If we are going to be targeted we might as well be on our own, not as some apostate defines us.
That is also why, in this forum we distance ourselves from the label "protestant" and fly under the Calvinist, etc. banners.
I would suggest you find some, get to know them better, and then ask them. Barring that, I suggest you go with what you typed above, until you get agreement on something less strenuous to type. You see, I'm not them, and IMO it's bigotry to assume that all of us non-Catholic/Orthodox types are all alike, that we're all "Protestants", or that the sins of a few can be blamed on all who look like them. Such beliefs I would label as "Anti-Protestantism".
In short, I don't buy in to the silent assertion of this thread's article. I refuse to believe that bigotry is okay for any group to commit. Some of the reactions to the article have been, to say the least, interesting.
How about "undocumented" that seems to be the politically correct term for anyone who cannot be assigned to a specific group.
It would be silly of me to cry "Catholic bashing" when someone speaks ill of my church, since I am a Baptist.
Slip in any ethnic label bwteen the words "you" and "all" [blacks, orientals, indians, etc] and then try saying that again.
So, don't expect a Catholic to sort your distinctions out, especially when you collectively and in unified front busy yourselves with what the Catholics think and do.
BWA HAHAHAHAHAHA! "Collectively and in unified front"???
Karl Rove would be so proud! Excuse me...
BWA HAHAHAHAHAHA! [snort] [sniffle] BWA HAHAHAHAHAHA!
BTDT. The answer is often that they are "simply Christian". That sort of response comes up frequently enough even on this forum. Trouble is, "A" disagrees with "B" on some point, and both "A" and "B" insist that "C" is a blasted heretic. And if asked, I would say that I'm "simply Christian". (think about it). So that's not particularly useful. Worse, when one finds reference to one of these independent communities in the news, or elsewhere, sorting them out can be a practical impossibility. What to call them? I have, so far, IECIDIO, and blitiri. Both of which I came up with.
Go back and read EVERYTHING I've ever written on these threads. I think I used the term "heretic" once and apologized soon after. I've never used the term "Prots" (or any form thereof). And I have stated many times that I consider Martin Luther to be a fascinating man and I have read a lot of his writings.
As I noted earlier, ANYONE who reads this article and thinks that it is only an attack on Catholicism is being dangerously myopic. The left's goal is to destroy Christianity plain and simple. The left knows that to accomplish that, they must destroy Catholicism simply because we are by far the largest branch of Christianity. The author of this article opines that most Catholics are in disagreement with the Church over moral issues like abortion -- do not presume for a second that the author would not like to say the same thing about ALL Christians. There are a vast number of FReepers who I have had fierce debates on Catholic issues, even though we both understand that on critical moral subjects we are in total agreement.
How does a church "impose" its values on Americans? Are there penalties prescribed for non-adherence to Catholic doctrine?
Rather, the reverse is true. It is secular humanists who continue to try and impose their values on all Americans, including Catholics, (abortion.....homosexual "marriage"........removing all reference to God from public life......"hate" speech etc etc) and the Catholic Church is one of the few remaining bulwarks which still resists the secular, godless tide. Amazing really, considering all the problems which the Church has had in the US.
Many Catholics, or should I say CINOs, have sold out. They are the "good Catholics" whom Ms. Jacoby regards as the mainstream. Unfortunately, pockets of stubborn resistance still remain and in fact, may be growing. These hold to traditional values and prevent the total conquest which Ms Jacoby desires. Hence the hissy fit.
The word "impose" clearly implies that the Catholic Church is doing something un-American and is somehow violating our cherished "freedom". It isn't such a stretch to conclude from this that measures ought to be brought to bear against the Church. I foresee this push becoming stronger as the tide of immorality rises and the godless gnash their teeth at the thought of any obstruction to their whims and selfish impulses.
Perhaps Prodigals might work. How could using a term that implies that you look forward to their return to the fold be considered derogatory?
VERY well said!
I tend to use the term "'reformed' Christians." It points to the fact that all of these groups are derived from the "Reformation."
It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Catholic Church, or the Methodists, Baptists, etc. (with the exception of a cult that holds members against their will) to "impose" anything on anyone. None of us are forced to remain Catholics, Baptists, Calvinists, etc., we CHOOSE to do this and presumably we do this because of our faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
There is little doubt in my mind that the only churches the author of this garbage would like to see is these "I'm okay, you're okay, you don't really have to do or believe anything you want, Kumbaya singing" assemblies (I have difficulty calling them churches) that are popular in liberal enclaves.
It might, but I'm not qualified to say so. I'll let "them" answer.
I have heard many Baptists object, on the grounds that they believe that their community predates the "reformation".
That's when we just LOL. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.