Posted on 11/26/2001 2:49:05 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
Rhetorical Questions to myself and other Catholic Apologists here:
After reading numerous threads of what I term the "Freeper Wars," I'm going to state an assumption (which might well be terribly wrong) then ask a few rhetorical questions.
If a "Freeper Wars" thread (you know the type, starts out as a thread of interest to Catholic freepers, then turns into the standard anti-Catholic posts with attempts to defend the faith by the regular Catholic Apologists here) is several days old and several hundred posts long, the "undecided" will be few.
Your apologetics are not intended to convert those whose hearts and minds are closed (although, by the Grace of God it does indeed happen). They are intended to illuminate the intellect and soul of those still open to Truth, and still willing to learn. I doubt that many of those make it to that point in threads here, i.e., when threads are 200 to 300 posts or longer, several days old, etc.
Therefore, your time is being spent only on those you are directly responding to, when they do their own self search.
Is that an effective use of your time and talent? Or would prayer, not words, be more effective at this point? Are we trying to win souls, or points of debate?
Just a few thoughts I ask myself constantly on these types of threads, i.e., where is my time better spent, reading to my kids and spending time with my spouse, or trying to convert those late on a thread whose minds and hearts are hardened? Are there enough lurkers late in a thread to make it worth the amount of time and intense effort to defend the faith that these threads usually entail late in their usual progression?
I wade through only small bites of the threads you refer to.
I want to take the opportunity to state one opinion, and I will try to keep it brief.
I am a conservative Christian. Non-Catholic. I and we have liturgical and canonical differences with Catholicism.
We worship the same God. (That part goes for Jews, too.)
My Catholic brothers and sisters follow Jesus.
Now:
Jews and Christians have lots more important things to spend time on when it comes to apologetics or just simply faith.
First, the postmodernist left assaults us on all fronts. One day, they go after the Baptists. Next day, the Catholics. Then the Jews.
All that is Judeo-Christian is under attack. Our adversary in the USA is not other Godly people who don't believe as we do. It is the politically correct movement that seeks to destroy us and all that this nation and this civilization was founded upon.
Secondly, there is the pagan world outside. A few billion heathen who worship idols and nature and incense and Lord-knows-what-else are out there, and they'd love to destroy the West and all things Judeo-Christian. In fact, their hatred and vows of violence are set forth clearly in their texts and their liturgy.
When we have firmly reasserted the fact that this nation was founded as a CHRISTIAN nation, and when the P.C. crowd and postmodernists are defeated in the arena of the minds of men, THEN we can examine OUR differences.
As Franklin Graham noted, we---Jews and Christians---worship the same God. The true God.
deno = pick
and minations = a few obscure verses and start your own religion based on twisted logic
If it ain't in the Bible, it's a cult.
Sell this in Ireland.
One man's "doctrinal difference" is another man's "damnable heresy".
OK, lets put aside the Freeper Wars mentality, and re-state the original post. Remove "Catholic" and replace it with "Christian," (which obviously Christians should be doing regardless.
Then, address the issues raised here in that new light:
Rhetorical Questions to myself and other CHRISTIAN Apologists here:
After reading numerous threads of what I term the "Freeper Wars," I'm going to state an assumption (which might well be terribly wrong) then ask a few rhetorical questions.
If a "Freeper Wars" thread (you know the type, starts out as a thread of interest to CRISTIAN freepers, then turns into the standard anti-CHRISTIAN posts with attempts to defend the faith by the regular CHRISTIAN Apologists here) is several days old and several hundred posts long, the "undecided" will be few.
Your apologetics are not intended to convert those whose hearts and minds are closed (although, by the Grace of God it does indeed happen). They are intended to illuminate the intellect and soul of those still open to Truth, and still willing to learn. I doubt that many of those make it to that point in threads here, i.e., when threads are 200 to 300 posts or longer, several days old, etc.
Therefore, your time is being spent only on those you are directly responding to, when they do their own self search.
Is that an effective use of your time and talent? Or would prayer, not words, be more effective at this point? Are we trying to win souls, or points of debate?
Just a few thoughts I ask myself constantly on these types of threads, i.e., where is my time better spent, reading to my kids and spending time with my spouse, or trying to convert those late on a thread whose minds and hearts are hardened? Are there enough lurkers late in a thread to make it worth the amount of time and intense effort to defend the faith that these threads usually entail late in their usual progression?
Main Entry: clarion
Function: adjective
Date: 1841
: brilliantly clear ; also : loud and clear
It seems Christians waste so much time and energy on Free Republic fighting each other (myself included!!!) when the real enemy goes undisturbed, or even terribly amused, at our internecine warfare.
Main Entry: in·ter·ne·cine
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin internecinus, from internecare to destroy, kill, from inter- + necare to kill, from nec-, nex violent death -- more at NOXIOUS
Date: 1663
1 : marked by slaughter : DEADLY; especially : mutually destructive
2 : of, relating to, or involving conflict within a group
When will the infighting cease and the real fighting, against our real, common enemy, begin? This internecine warfare on free Republic is killing our united front againt the real enemy, Satan.
How about cutting the apologetics efforts against Catholics 50% and devote that 50% to the real battle, so that we Catholics wasting our time defending the Faith against anti-Catholicism can do likewise.
That would mean a 100% increase in fighting the devil on Free Republic and a 100% decrease in efforts that serve him more than Christ, because it further destroys the unity of the Body of Christ.
IMO, the real question is, "Can you tell from what someone has written whether they still have an open mind?"
I think most people don't have an open mind when they jump into a bashing thread, neither the defenders nor the attackers. I tend to avoid them, although sometimes I will chastise a fellow Protestant who has clearly listened to propaganda without attempting to truly understand the Catholic expression of our faith.
Shalom.
Some thoughts on apologetics from C.S. Lewis, whom I mentioned earlier, and in the direction I thought you were going originally (and seem to be going now):
Each of us has his individual emphasis: each holds, in addition to the Faith, many opinions which seem to him to be consistent with it and true and important. And so perhaps they are. But as apologists it is not our business to defend them. We are defending Christianity; not "my religion". When we mention our personal opinions we must always make quite clear the difference between them and the Faith itself. God in the Dock
One of the great difficulties is to keep before the audience's mind the question of Truth. They always think you are recommending Christianity not because it is true but because it is good. And in the discussion they will at every moment try to escape from the issue "True - or False" into stuff about a good society, or morals, or the incomes of Bishops, of the Spanish Inquisition, or France, or Poland - or anything whatever. You have to keep forcing them back, and again back, to the real point. Only thus will you be able to undermine ... their belief that a certain amount of "religion" is desirable but one mustn't carry it too far. One must keep on pointing out that Christianity is a statement which, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The one thing it cannot be is moderately important. God in the Dock
And, with your indulgence, one more...
Here is a door, behind which, according to some people, the secret of the universe is waiting for you. Either that's true, or it isn't. And if it isn't, then what the door really conceals is simply the greatest fraud, the most colossal "sell" on record. Isn't it obviously the job of every man (that is a man and not a rabbit) to try to find out which, and then to devote his full energies either to serving this tremendous secret or to exposing and destroying this gigantic humbug? God in the Dock
As an additional observation, Lewis commented numerous times that his efforts were not to "make new Anglicans, but new Christians." He felt his calling was to get them into the great hallway of the Faith; once there, they could each choose the doorway (denomination) where they were most comfortable.
How many repent of catholicism, and to which faith do they go?
Not that you're prejudiced or anything.
Shalom.
Very nicely said.
That's a personal, prudential decision.
I tend to do this in those "nothing else to do" times or when I feel like watching some tele-garbage.
Are there enough lurkers late in a thread to make it worth the amount of time and intense effort to defend the faith that these threads usually entail late in their usual progression?
It's very well worth it. There is no better way to evangelize. Why? Here are some reasons that I've come up with:
1) There is time to think over points of contention between replies, unlike real-time real life.
2) People can express their true feelings regarding the Church, things that they wouldn't feel comfortable speaking with you about in person.
3) People are exposed to Catholic arguments here that they would never otherwise hear. When was the last time you visited a non-Catholic apologetics web-site?
Also, I've begun to create a library of my answers to FAQ's saved with HTML coding. It should speed up future replies.
Right now, I'm responding to errors regarding Church teachings and allegations against the Church on various threads, not always devoted specifically to religious issues, in an effort to reach others.
Each of our posts is a rain drop, and given time, all of these drops can break a dam.
I'm sure you're right in your observation, supra. I'm not so sure that we frail human creatures are always so good at identifying which is true and which is false. For instance, I'm reminded of the parable of the wheat and the tares. As well as the sourcerer who was casting out spells "in Jesus' name; without looking it up, Jesus' response was something along the lines of "He who is not against us is for us." Not to mention the parable of the sower, which tells us that it is our job to cast out the good seed, but that the harvest is the responsibility of God.
All things considered, I believe I would rather do and say things that tend to build up the body of Christ, even if an occasional false "tare" is roped in, than to do anything that would tend to tear down the body of Christ for fear that I would chase the wrong person away.
Peace.
I'm not sure this is relevant. In the end times, the only church that true believers will want to attend will be those that are dying. Popular churches will be those that tickle the ears of the attenders without teaching any of the true doctrine of the faith.
One thing you can say about the Catholic Denomination (not counting various rebellious bishops and priests) is that they still stand up for their beliefs. They are driven by their love for G-d, not their desire to be socially acceptable. They are not the only ones, but they are there. That is one reason I respect them so much.
Shalom.
Not Catholic, but the question is nevertheless relevant. I find there is time to do all of the above. I spend time with family and friends, and stay anxiously engaged in life away from FR too.
Whether someone is "converted" or not by anything posted at FR I don't worry about any longer. A person who is "converted" by the words of another person isn't really converted at all. A person is only truly converted by the Spirit of God, and that is in God's hands.
I am as likely to post here to take a stand against evil as I am for any other reason. There is a virtue in shining a bright light on dark deeds and ideas. In this late stage of our nation's descent into the abyss of socialist-cum-libertarian selfishness, moral relativism, and nanny government intrusiveness, strong words of warning and alarm are patently appropriate.
But have at it!
For some reason that I fail to understand, G-d decided to leave His church in the hands of sinful people. I'm going to have to talk to Him about that when I get to heaven. Clearly if He had asked me how to run the universe, it would be much better. </sarcasm> (Really, it was sarcasm. No need for the thunder. I was joking. JOKING. OK? Alright, I'M SORRY. Quit with the thunder!)
Anyway, as long as the person holds Jesus as the center I am happy with their faith and their practice of it. Hopefully, the other person will think the same way about me. When that day comes, Jesus' prayer will be answered, "That they all may be one."
Of course there will be people who worship their denomination more than they worship the Christ whom their denomination was established to serve. That will happen within the RC church and without it. We mess up and worship the thing rather than the giver even when G-d gives it to us with His own hand. Remember the Bronze Serpent? If I could remain focused on Jesus, then I would have no problem with anything I have ever known in the RC church.
Shalom.
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.