These French War of Religion themed hreads are like South bashing threads here
Both sides at times rather testy and ad hominem
Catholic chauvinism on display frequently ....it happened to me yet again two days ago here courtesy EbbTide in spite of the fact I was being approving of Catholic history against Islam etc
Usual freeper nastiness
And yes non Catholics who often seem to be ex Catholics attack Rome
I simply know any Baptists or Presbyterians or Pentecostals or methodists where I live who hate Catholics
Nor did I grow up with Catholics in my own extended family and friends who loathed my Southern Baptist denominational Faith
We do find the Mary thing and Pope tradition odd admittedly
But personally if an individual prefers Catholicism so what and same for other Christian sects
Here it’s like a war and you’re a brigadier at a minimum Daniel...
Is this a northern thing?
My mom’s dad was Lutheran. Her mother was Catholic. They were from New Orleans. Each attended their own church. Everyone got along fine.
The stakes are much higher, and so is the temperature. And while ad hominems are forbidden by the RM (and which includes labeling a poster anti-Catholic) - though as warranted they can be Scriptural, but not due to lack of argument - yet as the RM also advises ,
Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expected Posters may argue for or against beliefs, deities, religious authorities, etc. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule. “Open” RF debate is often contentious. It requires thick skin. A poster must be able to make his points while standing his ground, suffering adverse remarks about his beliefs - or letting them roll off his back. Members of religions which are as much culture as belief sometimes take religious debate personally. If you keep getting your feelings hurt because other posters ridicule or disapprove or hate what you hold dear, then you are too thin-skinned to be involved in “open” RF debate. You should IGNORE “open” RF threads altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.”
Catholic chauvinism on display frequently ....it happened to me yet again two days ago here courtesy EbbTide in spite of the fact I was being approving of Catholic history against Islam etc
Too often it seems only "true RCs" can attack and even reject the pope and engage in criticism of Catholic history, and since you were not wearing the correct uniform, you were subject to some pot shot.
And yes non Catholics who often seem to be ex Catholics attack Rome
Indeed, usually in response to provocative promotions of her, as this thread, who are reproved but those who see the differences btwn what the NT church believed and what Rome claims it did, based upon what she can "infallibly" channel out of her tradition."
And believers are commanded "ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 3)
I simply know any Baptists or Presbyterians or Pentecostals or methodists where I live who hate Catholics
Now you are sounding like liberals who equate warranted opposition to such things as the homosexual agenda to hating them. I do not hate Catholics, and live in a predominately RC are, with friends who are, but esteem for Scriptural doctrine has resulted in my both contending against prohomosexual polemics as well as those of cults, liberal Protestant and Catholicism.
But since it is the latter that is the predominate single religious group here which has turned FR into a RC news and polemical service, by the hands of traditional RCs who exalts her as the one true church while seriously misrepresenting it, and being fundamentally contrary to it, then such calls provoke can call for reproof.
Nor did I grow up with Catholics in my own extended family and friends who loathed my Southern Baptist denominational Faith
But note that traditional RCs is what you are dealing with here, some of whom uphold the historical teaching on EENS without the V2 spin, ,such as
Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence: "The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that..not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart into everlasting fire...unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that..no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” — Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (Seventeenth Ecumenical Council), Cantate Domino, Bull promulgated on February 4, 1441
We do find the Mary thing and Pope tradition odd admittedly
It is not simply "odd," but odious to exalt the holy, humble, virtuous spirit-filled mother of Jesus to being an almost almighty demigodess, attributing to her powers and position and glory and titles that go far far above that which is written, (1Co. 4:6) and are nowhere given to any created being, but which largely parallel those of the Divine Son of God.
But personally if an individual prefers Catholicism so what and same for other Christian sects
You mean salvific and basic doctrine is a dirty word, and it does not matter if you think God is a polygamist and Mormonism (which also has a tradition of a heavenly Mother) is the one true church, or that Christ is a created being and that there is no eternal punishment for the wicked save for annihilation, and that the Watchtower Society is the one true org, or that grandiose delusions of Swedenborg do not call for reproof when promoted here, or those of the cultist Roy Masters, all of which have been here, but nothing of the magnitude of Catholics.
While as concerning basic conservative values, all such can, to varying degrees, work against the common enemy of Western liberalism and fundamental Islamic Jihad, and in that regard we would elect a Pharisee to Congress overall any of the Democrats.
Yet which liberalism includes your seeming premise that salvific and basic doctrinal Truths are inconsequential, that what Scripture teaches besides moral values should not matter. But which leads to its moral values not mattering either, which is liberalism. While evangelicals voted 80% for a Mormon to be president over a liberal, yet that does not mean the perverse beliefs of that cults are to be reproved. At least the TradCaths believe in the importance of doctrine, while being subscribing to false doctrines of Rome.
Here it’s like a war and you’re a brigadier at a minimum Daniel... Is this a northern thing?
No, it's a Biblical thing, for we are indeed in a war, not simply a cultural war in which the conservative remnant of Catholics and cultists may join the majority of evangelicals against the common enemy of liberalism and fundamental Islam, but a larger, spiritual war for the souls of men, in which the devil seeks the damnation of souls. And who not only works thru liberals in seeking to create (thru proxy servants of his) an alternative "secular" world with demonic immoral perversions of what God has ordained, but also in the religious world, introducing and fostering perversions of spiritual Truth essential for salvation.
The Scribes and Pharisees were ultra conservatives, and evangelicals are the strongest political supporters of their descendants, yet pride and denial of need for salvation thru the risen Divine Christ, on His account, not the merits on one's own self or one true church (or Mary), means dying in your sins and suffering eternal damnation. And love for God, His Truth and souls means contending for both Scriptural morality and doctrine, as the Lord and His prima NT church did, though I come far short of both.