Posted on 02/23/2010 9:25:41 AM PST by stfassisi
“How is this thread not the functional equivalent of Jack Chick tract?”
If it were, would that mean you could be held responsible for all of Chick’s worst excesses? Would that give others the right to insist, over your protests, that you believe this and that because they read it in Chick?
I never heard of this Rao guy, and I don’t think it’s proper for Catholics to be held responsible for his writings.
SnakeDoctor complained that, “Protestantism is characterized as “mindless” and “at best pious moralizing without the active involvement of the human mind”; “at worst an insane religion of bodily writing and senseless howling”. He constructs straw men (such as joyless Protestantism, “complete depravity”, “permanent fast”, etc.)”
About that I have two things to say.
1. Some guy named Rao said that, not I, nor anyone here.
2. There are protestants here who habitually, frequently post things about Catholicism that are just as bad, and often worse. I am quite frankly amazed at their expressed blindness to their own conduct, when they are so quick to react strongly when those same insults are leveled at them.
Right!
And what's with this anti-semitic aspect to what Cardinal Vlk calls Lefebvrism?
Why do you support John Rao, who apparently writes not just anti-American but anti-semitic material? And then goes to the Czech Republic to spread anti-Americanism there?
Protestantism, in the total depravity doctrine, disdained reason along with the rest of Creation. It was frightened by the endless wrangling over philosophical issues that seemed to accompany admission of the value of the human mind, and felt it to be dangerous to a secure faith. It gradually recognized that a preoccupation with dogmatic theology was also harmful, in that it underlined the innumerable disagreements over specifics entertained by the legion of Protestant denominations. Protestantism, therefore, degenerated into a mindless form of Christianity. At best, it exhausted itself in pious practices, moralizing, and social work, as though one could long remain in agreement even about their proper character without the active involvement and adhesion of the human mind. At worst, it became an insane religion, whose liturgy encompassed bodily writhings and senseless howling. In either case, the men of thought were shown that they had nothing, really, to tell it.
Total depravity of man is the first T in the TULIP, an influential system of Protestant thought. Why is it a "straw man"?
The inability of Protestantism to come to a single denominator on theology is fact of life. That is very visible on the value, or lack thereof, that it places on good work. Ther spectrum is from Salvation Army, a Protestant Church that became a charity, to full-TULIP calvinism only capable of gazing at its own glory-predestined navel. A rational mind -- rational it is, if it starts with the false, but axiomatic for a Protestant premise of Bible Alone, asks, what does the Scripture really say? -- and ends up with another denomination, all his own. A practical mind instead calls for philosphical relativism ("they are all correct" or "you can't be the only true religion"). Either case, the end result is mindlessness. Agree or disagree, this is meat for thought.
And, what is Protestant liturgy?
Jack Chick, on the other hand, has cartoons about the pope and the mafia. I don't think the comparison can be made.
Do you have a comment on the article?
Do you have any responses to the many questions I've posed on this thread about the AUTHOR of the article -- John Rao? The author of the article who was identified by a Cardinal of the Church of Rome as an anti-semite and a spewer of anti-American canards, the author whose body of work is so counter to the philosophy of Free Republic that the AUTHOR's material is now banned from the site?
Still waiting for a response to any of the questions I've posed to you.
>> 1. Some guy named Rao said that, not I, nor anyone here.
I only attributed the comments to those that commended the article as worthwhile, or said the points were “interesting” or had merit. If that isn’t you, then no worries.
>> 2. There are protestants here who habitually, frequently post things about Catholicism that are just as bad, and often worse. I am quite frankly amazed at their expressed blindness to their own conduct, when they are so quick to react strongly when those same insults are leveled at them.
One cannot simultaneously object to having the aforementioned rant applied to all Catholics — and then attribute the posts of one Protestant to all Protestants. Either the insults are warranted, or they are not. Don’t disclaim any responsibility for the content of the post, (point 1), and then make excuses for why the content is warranted (point 2).
SnakeDoc
>> Either case, the end result is mindlessness. Agree or disagree, this is meat for thought.
I am disintrested in having a theological conversation with a person that finds my faith “mindless” — or anyone, for that matter, who would level such an accusation at a fellow Christ-follower.
Thanks anyway, chief.
SnakeDoc
I will, however, add the following ...
Protestantism is united insofar as it is a rejection of some of the tenets of Catholicism. But, Protestantism is not a single faith — it is a group of Christian denominations which is united in its rejection of certain portions of Catholic doctrine.
As a Baptist, I regard both Catholicism and Calvinism (for example) as denominations of Christianity to which I do not ascribe because of theological disagreements. My faith, however, has commonalities with both Catholicism and Calvinism. I have more in common with Calvinists in that both denominations have rejected specific Catholic doctrines — but commonalities exist between all Christian denominations.
Protestantism is, fundamentally, about defining a core Christian faith according to the Scripture. As such, the only united Protestant faith that you’re likely to encounter is with regard to two defining characteristics ...
(1) the essentials of Christianity — i.e. those tenets of Christianity which are undeniable (creation, original sin, flood, virgin birth, miracles, crucifixion, bodily resurrection, second coming, etc.)
(2) rejection of Catholic heirarchy, traditions, and rituals and Canon law as extra-scriptural.
Debates between Catholics and Protestants on the second point will rage until Kingdom Come. However, there should be little debate among Christians on the first point(s) — and there is little cause to smear fellow-Believers as “mindless” simply because of disagreement on the second point.
The article is a smear campaign against fellow Christians, and it is unconscionable. To what purpose? Why label fellow Christ-followers as mindless and incapable of joy? Why smear a fundamentally Christian theology that has brough millions-upon-millions to belief in Christ as “fruitless”? Would Christ Himself approve? Could there possibly be an ulterior motive to seek to discredit and dehumanize an entire branch of Christianity?
I’ve lost a LOT of respect for several individual Catholics on this board that I previously regarded as allies in Christ.
SnakeDoc
Very good sir, and thank you for your response. I had suspected as much, but some of our separated brethren appear to believe otherwise.
“One cannot simultaneously object to having the aforementioned rant applied to all Catholics — and then attribute the posts of one Protestant to all Protestants.”
When I wrote, “There are protestants here who,” I explicitly and clearly refrained from attributing the posts of one protestant to all protestants.
It seems very clear to me that I spoke of “those protestants here who,” and *not* all protestants. I am puzzled that you seem to have thought otherwise.
“I am disintrested in having a theological conversation with a person that finds my faith “mindless””
Do you have anything to say about the individual protestants here who have called Catholicism “mindless?”
When you have a comment on the subject matter of the article, make it.
That “commonality” is simply the remnant of Catholic faith that all Protestants have. The moment a Protestant steps outside of that remnant, he has a faith of his own. That is exactly like you describe, and it is pathetic. Christ warned against those who scatter the flock (Mt 12:30, Luke 11:23, John 10:12, John 17 entire chapter). Yet this is exactly what you guys do.
The cultural and social outcomes of Protestantism are now evident, as this great nation is about to lose its Christian identity altogether. Since Protestantism is the dominant religion here, or at least it has been, it is a fair topic to examine why.
I fully understand that it is an unpleasant read, but this is a discussion forum and so far the only discussion was how best to pull the article.
Freepers should be able to do better.
What would you call sending papal armies against people who opposed the sale of indulgences, if not scattering the flock? Your own church is reaping a bitter harvest, due to past corruption.
If you have no idea of what I'm referencing, I'd suggest a little study of the Waldenses. The headquarters of their world ministry is here in North Carolina.
Conservative stimates of just how many pacifist Waldensians were killed, run into the tens of thousands. As far as an authoritative source, I'd suggest beginning with Giorgio Tourn.
It is true that Protestantism is a product of the Western Church, so we as Western Catholics bear the responsibility for that. It is not just that when our Church is slandered daily we feel the need to respond and maybe point to a log or two in the accuser’s eye. It is also that ultimately, it is the Western Church that has the responsibility for restoring the unity.
The sale of indulgences was stopped almost as soon as it started. There was corruption in the Church and probably still is, as in any influential organization. None of that justifies the shipwreck of faith that the so-called reformers engineered under the pretext of fighting the indulgences.
>> Christ warned against those who scatter the flock (Mt 12:30, Luke 11:23, John 10:12, John 17 entire chapter). Yet this is exactly what you guys do.
Your protest rings hollow. Your arrogant disdain for, and intentional alienation of, Protestant followers of Christ does far more to scatter the flock than I ever could. I previously considered you and I united as members of the body of Christ.
>> The moment a Protestant steps outside of that remnant, he has a faith of his own. That is exactly like you describe, and it is pathetic. [...] I fully understand that it is an unpleasant read, but this is a discussion forum and so far the only discussion was how best to pull the article.
That is as it should be.
Like I said, I am disinterested in having a theological discussion with someone that regards my faith as “pathetic”.
I have lost respect for you — with whom I recall previously having reasonable theological discussions — and anyone that agrees with you. I have little more regard for you and your “theology” than I do your run-of-the-mill Christian-hating atheist.
This conversation is over.
SnakeDoc
>> Do you have anything to say about the individual protestants here who have called Catholicism “mindless?”
No. It has become clear from this article, and the ensuing discussions, that we are indeed separate faiths. Defend your own religion.
SnakeDoc
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.