Defending the Faith (Catholic Caucus)

self ^ | January 8, 2010 | vanity

[Judith Anne]

In the age of the internet, a lot of very good information is readily available for those who have sincere questions about the Catholic Church. The Catholic Encyclopedia, the Online Catechism, many good apologetic sites--all have excellent answers to nearly any question that anyone could devise.

There is really no need for FR Catholics to engage in endless religious argument, and I would like to urge us all to simply refrain. We could resign from the debating society and let those who sincerely want to learn seek it out for themselves from a local priest or look it up on the net. Others, who do not sincerely want to learn, could be ignored, and privately remembered in prayer.

Opinions from fellow Catholics?

[Cronos]

some of the threads here can be gruesomely fascinating

I know -- some of the godfatherly and other gangster / nazi analogies or even the early bits about Vicky and Lucy (the Vicar of Christ and Lucifer -- I refer to Havoc threads from 2002-2003) have descended to the surreal very quickly.

We used to have massive arguments with the Orthodox (yes arguments) circa 2004 - 2007, but those were different: I believe that both parties learnt more about each other and what we need to do to be more in communion. Since then, both Orthodox and Catholics have actually gotten closer

We are able to have such debates with less rancour with Lutherans and Anglicans too.

If you look at the general theology of the general anti-Church posters, you'll find they tend to be in "way-out-there" groups, groups with themes on UFO-logy, small groups of a couple of thousand that may call themselves orthodox or presbyterian or baptist or others (there is a overflow of acronyms) and who, I suspect, don't even agree with each other on basic theology but agree that they like to attack The Church.

But, I am glad that the debates have struck a chord with you -- they did with me too and have led me to explore my faith more. Dare I say it, they've made me more convinced in the truth that is The Church.


Bashem Hashem Trashem
(an inside joke)

[Desdemona]

Bruckner is one of my favorite composers. I don't know that I've ever sung that one, though.

Believe me, I understand. Our poor music librarian...

[Cronos]

Can non-catholic but Catholic friendly posters be invited to the thread?i>

Of course! You don't have to be friendly to the Church, just respectful of the terms of the caucus and use the caucus threads as an opportunity to learn more about the faith of the members. ditto for us on other caucuses.

[Cronos]

If I was a lurker and my only knowledge of the Catholic Church came from unanswered statements by non-Catholics here, I would believe that the Catholic Church was the most evil institution in history and that its members were Satanic cult members. And nazis, and idolators and polytheists and gangsters and ......

[reaganaut]

I always ask to join a caucus thread out of politeness. Don’t want to step on any toes and I do understand why they were created.

[Cronos]

FReeper John Doe is a member of the Church of Funny Math and continually says that Catholics believe that 3+2=7. Every time he says this, several Catholic FReepers correct him and tell him that the actual answer is 5, but still he persists and even has a ping list of Funny Mathites who tell everyone that Catholics believe 3+2=7.

That set me laughing out aloud!!! The Mathites can be funny at times, but you're right, they do repeat the same lies over and over again and for lurkers who don't read up elsewhere, that can be very damaging.


Hashem Bashem and Trashem
(an inside joke)

[Cronos]

Every time I call them out for being dishonest scum my posts get deleted

Ah, but there's a better way than just calling them what they are. In many of the way out there types, it's easier to point out the holes in their arguments/logic/sanity -- after hearing someone talk about the great Boar of Babylong :) and then making a number of errors, lurkers and everyone kind of get the picture that the d.scum is really an insane d.s.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Instructing the ignorant is not one of my spiritual jobs because I’m no good at it. Instead, I must choose other corporal and spiritual works of mercy.

Please remember that the Lord's intention for us may not be to win the war or even to win today's battle, but merely to fight the good fight and honor Him with our sacrifice. In my experience I have done best in attempting a variety or works of mercy. You have made a valuable contribution here over the years in this newly emerging global public square of the Internet. I hope that you will continue on this forum. Please just pray to have God guide you and go where you feel God is calling (or, more often than not, pushing!).

[IrishCatholic]

Well, if you have the time, knock yourself out. Like I said you are a better man than I.

Rarely will a dispassionate bystander tread through those 500+ posts sorting out the distortions and minutia. Instead it is like reading a....(He who must not be named) comic. You can go picture by picture describing the lies and showing the hate, or you can simply call it what it is, drop it in the trash, and move on.

Hate groups feed on attention, whether positive or negative. I’d rather see them starve.

[Judith Anne]

Good morning, God bless us!

I’ve just caught up on all the remarks after having overnight dialup trouble due to the extreme cold.

Again, may you all be greatly blessed for your love of our Lord and our Church.

So, on open threads, any anti-Catholic can repeat any calumny s/he wishes about Our Lady and Catholic behavior, and we are to remain civil within the boundaries of the rules. Because we are (contrary to the opinion of some choir directors, LOL!) a fairly cohesive group such calumnies affect us all, and because our beliefs are deeply held, any anti-Catholc can engage the entire Catholic group by any such calumny.

I’d like to see all us Catholics stop the automatic argumentative response to such behavior. It serves mainly to entertain the insulter, who, no matter if s/he has had lies corrected before, does not earn the label “troll” for what is clearly trollish behavior. I’m not sure the arguments are “defending the faith” as much as providing jokes for the insulters to privately enjoy.

At one time, Mad Dawg wrote a hilarious breakdown of the tactics of anti-Catholics, and my copy of it has disappeared along with my last hard drive. Does anyone still have it? Because I’m sure it still applies.

Is there something specifically CATHOLIC we could do, in these religious arguments to remind us (and the lurkers) of who we are with respect to those who wish to tear us down?

Religion argument threads ought to be, at least in some respects, Holy Ground. Laugh if you want to, but if we are defending The Faith, it’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

[Judith Anne]

I pinged the RM because of my discussion of “trolls.”

[Judith Anne]

That was profound. Of course, the outcome is not my responsibility, God will take care of it. All I have to do is what I can do for Him.

[Judith Anne]

I like your “inside joke.” LOL!

[AnAmericanMother]

Our "music librarian" is three of us who occasionally wade into the tables at the back of the music room and sort things into stacks. Then they get back in the slipcovers and onto the shelves . . . someday.

We're in temporary quarters while the parish hall is being rebuilt, we share the room with the handbell ringers and overflow paper and supplies from the copy room. At least somebody gave us a fairly decent small grand piano and we got rid of the nasty old Sunday School upright! (I proposed that we haul it to the local range and sell shots at it from a shotgun or rifle at $5 a pop, but everyone agreed it would be too much trouble to lift it into the back of the pickup truck, so it's been cast into outer darkness in the basement storage room.)

The Bruckner is one of a set of 7 or 8, all titled "Gradual". "Locus iste" and "Os justi" are two of the others that we have sung. I think our director's eventual intention is to work through them all.

[Cronos]

I wonder if we could have Christian Caucus thread which basically asks "So, what do YOU believe in?" -- let's face facts, we don't agree with Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses or others, but they have a right to a place where they can say "we believe in Xenu" and the rest of us can ask to learn more, but we can't go "Ha! Ha!".

If the religion forum is to work, there need to be periodic places where anyone, even those with way-out UFO, 2012 beliefs can express what they believe in and the rest of us can read, ask questions, but not mock or insult or even debate.

[Religion Moderator]

That is the objective of the “ecumenical” Religion Forum threads - no antagonism is allowed.

[Judith Anne]

We could, indeed, and you could start it; the overall topic, though, is huge. It might be an idea to compare/contrast one particular area of belief, ie sainthood, and compare/contrast two or three groups. And as the RM said, it would be under the “Ecumenical” heading, meaning no antagonism allowed, no criticism of others’ beliefs, only a statement of one’s own beliefs or civil, open questions about others’ positions, as I recall.

It is true that I am sleepy, so if I haven’t been clear in this post, please let me know and I’ll try to do better tomorrow.

[Judith Anne]

If you click on the RM’s name at the bottom of an RM post, you will see the definitions pertinent to the Religion Forum.

Here’s the RM’s definition of Ecumenical threads:

*******************

Ecumenic threads are closed to antagonism.

To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.

Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenic” thread can discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.

More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical fact and a legitimate subject for an ecumenic discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.

Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.

Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenic” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.

Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenic” tag.

Posters who try to tear down other’s beliefs or use subterfuge to accomplish the same goal are the disrupters on ecumenic threads and will be booted from the thread and/or suspended.

**********************

So, one or another topic could be proposed in an Ecumenic thread (they are very much under-used, in my opinion) and FReepers could be invited to share their own confession’s positions.

[markomalley]

VATICAN TURNS BLIND EYE TO ISLAMIC TERRORISM

One example.

[markomalley]

The latest anti-Catholic screed, the VATICAN TURNS BLIND EYE TO ISLAMIC TERRORISM thread, was just pulled, as I'm sure many of you know:

This, I think, is illustrative of what we need to do: push these toadies to really identify what they believe and make them come out to be the nasty pieces of work they, in fact, are.

And remember, <he who must not be named> must not be named in the Religion Forum. Not the other fora.

I have two requests for the "defending the faith" folks who have participated on this thread:

1. Please bookmark this thread. (You will note a "Bookmark" link just below the article...if you click on that, it will be saved to your links on your profile)
2. If you run into screeds like the VATICAN TURNS BLIND EYE TO ISLAMIC TERRORISM thread, please post them here and ping folks to that thread (or to your link on this thread)

I think if we confront these folks, we may end up getting some progress. Not with the <he who must not be named>-ista's, but with anybody who is somewhat reasonable...that is, most people.