Posted on 07/23/2008 2:47:21 PM PDT by Pyro7480
When Gov. Alfred E. Smith ran for president in 1928, his candidacy was derailed in large part by anti-Catholic prejudice. It has been nearly 48 years since John F. Kennedy became the first (and so far only) Roman Catholic president, but experts say that anti-Catholic sentiment — much of it originating in, or as a response to, immigrants in New York — remains an enduring force in American culture.
That was the consensus of a panel assembled at the Museum of the City of New York on Tuesday night to consider the question, “Is Anti-Catholicism Dead?”
...The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus — a leading conservative intellectual, a former Lutheran pastor and the editor of the leading Catholic journal First Things — offered a surprising view on the question.
“To be a Catholic is not to be refused positions of influence in our society,” he said. “Indeed, one of the most acceptable things is to be a bad Catholic, and in the view of many people, the only good Catholic is a bad Catholic.”
...He added that anti-Catholicism was as likely to come from the left — sometimes from commentators who believe that a “threatening theological insurgency is engineered and directed by Catholics,” with evangelical Protestants merely as the movement’s “foot soldiers.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com ...
LOL
What is it with all the zombies doing concerts these days? Maybe the end of the world is at hand, after all? Lynyrd Skynyrd was performing in Rockingham County recently, and I know for sure that they’re DEAD. And Hank Williams, Jr., too. He’s been dead at least twice.
Although I will have to agree Protestants bash Catholics far more than vice versa and many of the attacks cross lines, Catholics are not completely innocent. I can't seem to have a disagreement on these threads without being personally attacked. But here are a few of things I found. I am sure it will accomplish anything, as I really did intent to start fight.
____________________________
Everyone should then, to assure their salvation, be a formal member of this Church and profess what She professes. However, we make allowances for God to have mercy on those, who for reasons beyond their control, do not formally join the Catholic Church.
That's it. Those not formally part of the Catholic Church who are not culpable for this fact can be saved anyway. But this salvation is only possible because these people will be, in some mystical way, "inside" of the Church.
___________________________
__________________________________________
Just as gravity applies to everyone, regardless of those who don’t believe in it, so too does the truth administered to the world by the Catholic Church apply to all people.
__________________________________________
And I think people who slam the Blessed Mother, whatever they call themselves, are idiots and I really don't care what they worship.
I remember what an ever-loving dunce I was when I believed all that nonsense.
____________________________________________
The Catholic Church does not teach that all Protestants or non-Catholics are going to Hell. What it does teach is that anyone who know the Catholic Church is the one Christ founded and dies apart from it will not be saved.
_____________________________________________
Some protestants' behaviour is antithetical to Christianity (so is some Catholics').
_____________________________________________
Here's a few comments by Catholics which ALex Murphey document in 2007. Some are from deleted posts, but some can be easily found with a google search:
1/23: Brace thyself for the attacks of snake handlers, calvinists, "non-denoms" and others...
1/24: If you're upset that I called out the cults for what they are...sorry...but it's still an accurate depiction of the non-denoms, mormons, calvinists and other wacky cults.
2/5: Mormons...the cult that's become commonplace...so hard-up for membership that they have to resort to attempted spiritual kidnapping of the dead...
2/13: Fact is, John Calvin was an unintelligent, perverse fraud who founded a cult known as "calvinism." The Episcopal "Church" was started by an English king who could not get the Pope to accept the king's immoral ways. Luther was a disaffected, likely egomaniacal priest. Protestantism is a breakoff of mainstream Christianity that seeks to glorify the pastor more than the Lord. Presby's are some of the laziest "Christians" out there...as are all of their predestination cousins.
2/14: Would the calvinist cult members like some damnation with their heresy?
2/15: As for your post, you're also off base and reciting a continual lie of the snake handlers, calvinists and "pastor" worship folks at the Church of the Almighty Dollar.
2/21: Hey...I'm not surprised by anything the snake-handling crowd does. Their "churches" are simply shrines to the "pastors" - no theological foundation...
3/1: Why is this listed as a Catholic interest article? Why not Calvinists? They're the ones who practice the witchcraft.
3/2: You'll note that it's "Calvin" College. Again, I ask why are the activities at a cult center in the midwest relevant to Catholics?
3/4: I tell ya, this "reverend" ... is nothing more than an uneducated bumpkin. Wonder how much money he's skimming from the ship of fools attending his "church..."
3/4: You'd be stunned by how quickly these snake handlers degrade into profanity, anger and threats.
3/4: Again, a demonstration of a protestant being ignorant...
3/4: Let's have a little fun with that wackiest of prot sects, the Baptists
3/5: Being a protestant is in itself a demonstration of ignorance...
3/6: The pentacostals, "church of God" and others are simply inventions of men...designed to pump the ego and line the pockets of the "pastors." But continue donating...I'm sure your pastor is happy in his new Benz...
3/7: Martin Luther, being a relatively lazy type, deleted a good chunk of the Bible? A British king, attempting to justify his own heresy and immorality, heavily edited a version to suit his own twisted lifestyle?
3/7: Yes, if you're a born again, declared protty, then you're clear to do whatever you wish..."date" male hookers, cheat on your spouse, defraud donors of money intended for religious purposes...not that any protestant "ministers" did that or anything...
3/9: Perhaps things are different at your church - one of the, what, million protestant sects? However, the snake handling pentacostal calvinist wannabeatelevangelist "churches" here typically only use snippets.
3/14: Hell, most "Protestant" "churches" in my area are simply shrines to the ego (and pocketbook) of the "pastor."
3/28: Luther was a self-absorbed idiot...and his followers are fools...a complete bunch of utter fools.
3/28: Perhaps I'll just convert to that calvinist cult I've heard so much about.
3/31: That's the real origin of the Anglican church - born of sin and a king's ego,
Left two 'not' out. Should read 'will not' and 'did not'.
Nothing but love towards Proddies. < tongue in cheek>
Yeah, a freudian slip... LOL.
Great job on the homework, though. I’ll still go with Fr. Altier’s explanation. I don’t know who’s going to h-e-double tooth picks. It’s above my pay grade. Way above my pay grade.
Yes, proof reading prior to posting can be a good thing. It was a large HTML mess though.
Only one actually said the Catholic Church said non-Catholics were going to hell. One came close. That was the requirement.
What Alex documented is pretty calm compared to posts this week and last.
I’ve never called you a bigot. As a rule, I will leave the computer before engaging in that type of behaviour no matter how much I’m tempted. But that’s me and I can always find something else to do. (what time does tv go off?)
Which is a rule we should all have, but too often don't.
Ephesians 4:29
Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
I bet it was, a huge HTML mess. I try to do html in word. I’m always afraid that I’ll mess something up htmling in FR. Besides, the box is small.
And Elvis has left the building!
And how many of those quotes are embedded in anti-Catholic threads, or Catholic threads in the process of being hijacked or otherwise ruined? I don’t countenance some of these quotes myself (though some of them are obviously rhetorical devices giving back in kind what had just been received), but people say things out of frustration with the circumstances that they otherwise might not say. It’s called “attitude escalation.” Not a pretty thing, to be sure. But to deny that’s part of human nature is to be naive in the extreme, or an exercise in posturing bordering on the ludicrous. Almost, in fact, as naive or posturing as some folks are on this forum who claim that anti-Protestantism (measured either in threads or in total posts) is more prevalent here on FR than anti-Catholicism, measured in the same way.
Anyway, I’d be surprised if more than two of these quotes originated in Protestant-themed threads, or neutral ones. Nearly all of them, I’d bet, come from the types of threads mentioned above. Care to look into it?
BTW, a personal family emergency has slowed down my recently promised analysis of this very thing, but it’s coming shortly.
I know Christians who won’t contribute to Crisis Pregnancy Centers when they have Catholics on the board.
Thanks for returning after the artillery barrage you got in response to your post.
I will not address the question of who flames whom more. That would involve research. Yuck! But I don't think we ever said that we don't cross the line. It was comparative. So if your research shows that we, or some of us, do cross the line, that's not relevant.
I will admit to crossing the line myself, but the first instance of my doing so was when a notorious anti-Catholic posted a falsehood about what we believe. I had not yet realized that, consciously or not, that is a standard procedure among our antagonists.
... insisting that I can't find ONE examples on FR on Catholics denying salvation of non-Catholic Christians, I thought I should search a bit and see.The question is whether Catholics deny salvation to non-Catholics, right? If it isn't, I'll be wasting my time.
[Soothing Dave, post 95] Everyone should then, to assure their salvation, be a formal member of this Church and profess what She professes. However, we make allowances for God to have mercy on those, who for reasons beyond their control, do not formally join the Catholic Church.So this not only does NOT deny salvation to non-Catholics but explicitly says that non-Catholics CAN be saved.
Those not formally part of the Catholic Church who are not culpable for this fact can be saved anyway.....
[#194 Soothing Dave]What of it? Those who don't accept our teaching cannot be justified. Does that mean that small children and the feeble can not be justified? No. There are always exceptions for culpability.Once again, an explicit statement that non-Catholics CAn be saved.
[#55, Notwithstanding]that for that reason salvation is only through the Catholic Church.This may seem like nit-picking but it's not. There is a very important difference between saying salvation is through the Catholic Church and salvation is thorough being a member of the Catholic Church in full communion.
Please foller along a minnit here .... We think there is ONE Church, Christ has only one body on earth. IF (NOT "if and only if") you are baptized with water and the invocation of the Trinity you are a member of that Church. You may be a member NOT in "full communion", but you are a member, like it or not!
Another way to say it would be "IF you are a human in heaven you have been grafted into the body of Christ and raised with it. That's the Catholic Church in heaven." It's very close, in some respects, to the "invisible church" concept. The difference is that we claim that NOT the entirety of church-ness but the "fullness" of church-ness is in the Catholic Church on earth, a "Test" for which is "all those denominations in communion with the Bishop of Rome."
Is that kind of a little clear in my attempt to express it? To us it's NOT saying You have first to be Papist and then you can be saved; it's saying the process and reality (Whitehead fans, shut up!) of being saved includes as part of the whole, big, splendid gift, being brought, before or after death, fully into the one Church.
It's not hard to see why a quick or sloppy reading would lead to the conclusion that we are denying salvation to non-Catholics. But can we be to blame for people who react before they determine what they are reacting to?
[#17 invisible hand] is just nastiness and not theology.
[#146 ndkos]What it does teach is that anyone who know the Catholic Church is the one Christ founded and dies apart from it will not be saved.Again, the "class" described is defined as those who "know the Catholic Church is the one Christ founded ...". There are lots of Christians who do not know that and who aren't Catholic. They are not members of this class. Salvation is not denied to them on account of their not being Catholic. This quote does not make your case.
[#96 ArrogantBustard] just says (mistakenly IMHO) that all Protestants are heretics. It does not say no heretic can be saved. Further IMHO plenty of Protestants commit errors (as do I) which do not have the necessary element of willful disobedience to qualify as heresy.
The collection of nasties is indeed shameful, and because we papists believe in reparation I will do a little penance for them as soon as I post this reply. But it does not touch the question of salvation being denied to non-Catholics.
IN all sincerity, I think not a single one of the posts you present shows that the Catholic Church denies salvation to those who are not members, where "members" means something along the lines of "being in full communion". I'm afraid you will just dismiss my reply as shucking and jiving. All I can say is that since I first read Augustine in 1966 and Aquinas and intoxicating Dante in 1968, I have little by little picked up a lot of the Catholic "style" of thought and expression. I would not have "entered full communion" in the Catholic Church if I thought it taught and held what you say it teaches and holds.
For more info I commend you to the relevant sections of the Catechism, Looking up Baptism might be a place to start. But read CAREFULLY. You will hear stuff like "Baptism is ordinarily necessary for salvation," and maybe you will miss the "ordinarily", and then accuse us of saying no one who is not Baptized can be saved. Yeah, the unbaptized can be extraordinarily saved. You and we have an extraordinary and extraordinarily gracious God.
The number on the posts are linked to the original post. I am not sure how you judge that a thread is anti-Catholic or hijacked threads. I hope your family emergency is nothing serious.
I didn't find a one in the examples posted that said that. What did I miss?
I would think most every Protestant is quite aware of the Roman Catholic claim that Christ founded their church. By your explanation that eliminates most Protestants from salvation, or am I missing something? The exceptions you talk about are for babies or someone completely ignorant of the Catholic Church, not the vast majority of Protestants.
Sure they are -- they just think the claim is false. So you couldn't justly maintain that they know the Church was founded by Christ. It's those who do accept the claim as true and yet refuse to accept the Church who are the targets here.
I mean seriously, You know that we make the claim, but for many reasons, at least some of which are not culpable, you think it's totally nuts of us to do so. I think those reasons are partially exculpatory.
Someone who is not inclined or doesn't have the time or the wherewithal to research the claim, respectfully listens to his anti-Catholic pastor, whom his parents have always told him to respect and all that, and he concludes, well, I guess those Catholics are not only wrong but in bad trouble.
How can that pious, obedient, loyal, albeit (in my view) ignorant, response rise to the level of conscious, thoughtful, deliberate rejection of the true Church? I don't think it can.
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.