Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen
Scripture text: Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition
Magníficat ánima mea Dóminum, et exsultávit spíritus meus in Deo salvatóre meo, quia respéxit humilitátem ancíllæ suæ.
Ecce enim ex hoc beátam me dicent omnes generatiónes, quia fecit mihi magna, qui potens est, et sanctum nomen eius, et misericórdia eius in progénies et progénies timéntibus eum. Fecit poténtiam in bráchio suo, dispérsit supérbos mente cordis sui; depósuit poténtes de sede et exaltávit húmiles. Esuriéntes implévit bonis et dívites dimísit inánes. Suscépit Ísrael púerum suum, recordátus misericórdiæ, sicut locútus est ad patres nostros, Ábraham et sémini eius in sæcula.
Glória Patri et Fílio et Spirítui Sancto. Sicut erat in princípio, et nunc et semper, et in sæcula sæculórum.
Amen.
Caucus threads are closed to any poster who is not a member of the caucus.
For instance, if it says “Catholic Caucus” and you are not Catholic, do not post to the thread. However, if the poster of the caucus invites you, I will not boot you from the thread.
The “caucus” article and posts must not compare beliefs or speak in behalf of a belief outside the caucus.
There is no tolerance for posters coming onto a caucus thread claiming that they were once baptized into that belief and therefore are still a member of it due to the belief saying they are - even though they are not active in that belief and notoriously dispute that belief on “open” Religion Forum threads. The same holds for those who claim they are members because of their ancestry even though they are not active in that belief and notoriously dispute it on “open” RF threads.
That behavior is finessing the guidelines, it is flame baiting. No dice.
Also, there is little to no tolerance for non-members of a caucus coming onto the caucus thread to challenge whether or not it should be a caucus. Gross disruption usually follows.
If you question whether the article is appropriate for a caucus designation, send me a Freepmail. I’ll get to it as soon as I can.
This sounds like a great idea to me. I’m definitely interested.
narses, I’m not sure how this would work.
Generally apologetics is to explain the faith and if the only people allowed are already Catholic . . . ?
Of course I know that I cannot go to the open threads. It becomes an occasion of sin for me. Won’t be doing that again any time soon. lol
I appreciate your initiative on this, Narses. Are you thinking that this will be a place to bring up abuses in our parishes, or articles in the news, that need analysis, such as Fr. Zuhlsdorf engages in? For example, let me kick it off right here: The 2nd in command in my diocese was saying Holy Mass at my parish this past Sunday, and gave a talk in the afternoon. He used the phrase “Father Son , and Spirit twice - once in the Final Blessing, and once in the talk. Have any of you heard of liberals dropping the appendage “Holy”?
They would have to be posted as a Catholic Caucus and in the least as Ecumenical.
Act with charity, empathy, PRUDENCE, compassion, patience, and without a Manichaean view of the world that puts people in "The Good Camp" or "The Evil Camp." Respect their natural virtues. Respect them and respect what may be true in their religions (which can also, of course, be found in the Holy Faith) -- without respecting "their religions," per se. As to people who want to argue and such, there's this from St. Ambrose: To avoid dissensions we should be ever on our guard, more especially with those who drive us to argue with them, with those who vex and irritate us, and who say things likely to excite us to anger. When we find ourselves in company with quarrelsome, eccentric individuals, people who openly and unblushingly say the most shocking things, difficult to put up with, we should take refuge in silence, and the wisest plan is not to reply to people whose behavior is so preposterous. --Link
Count me amongst the cooperators.
I’m interested. One of the problems with the usual suspects showing up is not only does the tone become uncharitable, but the thread of the discussion is lost, as rather than pursuing the issue at hand in depth, several stock issues such as works and sexual abuse are heaved into the conversation.
Apologetics, by its nature, discusses why some people have problems with certain beliefs. I think one might be able to do this by mentioning the problems without mentioning the groups that have the problems, but this requires discipline.
Ensuring that no one breaks caucus would require that everyone have a solid grasp of caucus rules. NYer’s thread on relics yesterday http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2638228/posts was informative on the way that caucus works, but was also interesting to watch in terms of the amount of restraint necessary to keep from breaking caucus before the non-Catholic’s posts were pulled. I thought that the religion moderator did a good job, but things might have easily spun out of control. Would it be possible for a caucus to have some one overseeing the thread and get a rapid response from the religion moderator when some one does something that might potentially break caucus?
The anti-Catholics will continue to post their rants and they need to be challenged. I will join the ping list, though I'm not sure how that works- can anyone on the list ping the list? If so then when one runs across an anti-Catholic post, regardless of whether he/she has the time to reply, they can at least ping the list, and hopefully someone can refute the post.
I rarely respond to anti-Catholic posts due to my time constraints, occasionally one will prompt me to respond. When I do I find it challenges me to learn more about the Catholic position and it enlightens me as to what some non-Catholics think, which is also interesting.
As for resources, the internet is full of them- I believe the best bet is to google whatever it is that is being challenged, or search on Catholic.com. One can amass a library of resources, but unless you can search it quickly, it's not very helpful.
What we have to say might not change anyone's mind, at least immediately, but you will certainly be planting some seeds of doubt.
When you are up and running, put me on the ping list.
I don’t have a great deal to offer but I have a gread deal that I need to learn.