Are there people here at CAF, Catholics and non-Catholics that for the sake of ecumenicalism are compromising their own faith?

[AnthonyXM]

I follow a simple rule, and it is priceless.

Understand that out there are those who know better than I do.
If I encounter them I must listen to know if they are that quantity I seek.
I’m a fool if I simply try to master them in debate rather than see if they are the Quantity I seek.

Being thus wise I triumph, for I learn the truth - and make a friend who is wiser than I am.

Then there are those who seek the company of the ignorant - because it is easier.
Born to Lose.

God bless you.

 

[JimO]

Additionally, are there people here at CAF, Catholics and non-Catholics that because of a personal overriding desire towards ecumenicalism, and “being nice”, are actually undermining their own are religion?

Part of the problem you bring up is tied up in the fact that we are “discussing” our faith in written form wherein there are often many parties taking part and multiple side discussions going on in the same thread. Written communication has serious pitfalls even between two parties. Add the fact that we are all anonymous and that for every poster there are sometimes hundreds of “observers” and it greatly complicates the matter indeed.

There is nothing wrong with a “vigorous” defense of one’s faith, depending on how you define vigorous. I’ve read many posts that were very opinionated, decisive, and uncompromising and yet charitable. On the other hand, I’ve seen many insulting posts as well. I don’t think any of us can say whether someone is “undermining” their own faith by “being nice”, by which I assume you mean that they are not arguing vigorously enough in your estimation.

Some people want to bludgeon others into submission. Is this really the way to win souls? In most cases it probably isn’t. There are those, however, who need a good thumping over the head to come to their senses. The problem is that an anonymous forum is not the place to judge when someone needs harsher treatment. That kind of treatment/response requires the building of a relationship, which is best done in person.

So, the bottom line for me is that I believe we can “be nice” and be charitable without compromising our faith. No one way of discussion is always correct. It’s good to have many different personalities as long as everyone stays within reasonable parameters.

 

[JimO]

Does that mean that it isn’t unkind to tell people who think they can find their own way to God through good works, religion etc that they are wrong because the Lord Jesus says;

“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. John 14:6.

There is nothing wrong with telling someone the truth. You do, however, have to be careful not to misunderstand another’s faith and the teaching of their Church. You see, I agree with your statement about “people who think they can find their own way to God through good works, religion, etc.” and the Catholic Church agrees with it as well. If you are suggesting that Catholics believe this way, then you don’t understand the teachings of the Church. There are individuals who call themselves Catholic who don’t understand the teachings of the Church either and might give you the impression they think this way, but the Church does not teach that we can find our own way to God through works and religion. We are saved by the Grace of God through Christ who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Anyone who tells you that the Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by our own efforts is simply wrong.

 

[Pug]

Yet, threads titles like, “Was Mary Raped by God”, which I repeatedly complained about, get absolutely no response from these same people.

I usually avoid threads with certain titles if I suspect they will contain too many argumentative posts or too many posts where I will be tempted to suspect the motives of the other posters. Some threads have a lot of potential to scandalize those who hear for the seeming lack of charity displayed. *John 13:35 “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” *A non-Catholic will throw this verse up. I’ve seen it. Actually, I’m not so worried about the one who throws up the verse. I’m worried about the one who just leaves.

Perhaps with the complaints (and then lack thereof) about thread titles you are witnessing people holding the Catholic to the higher standard. I probably do that in my mind.

I some cases, I feel that some here, think that it is more important to be “liked”, than it is to defend or explain their own faith.

There is a balance there. I don’t think the point is to be “liked”, though. I think the point is to maintain a level tone, so that the other person doesn’t just tune you out as you explain the faith. But then, I have noticed with some annoyance that the slightly inflammatory posts get a higher response rate. I’m not sure what I think of that. I don’t think we should deliberately arouse anger as a hook to get people to listen. Over the long haul, this is probably spiritually unhealthy for the listeners. I don’t mean posts that inflame to love. That is a good hook!

where some Catholics have a subjective belief that another Catholic isn’t being as “nice” as they would like them to be…

Sometimes I judge that someone is using language or an approach that I wouldn’t use myself. This ought to be left untouched, in my view. At other times, I judge that someone is employing language that is counterproductive or against charity. I rarely say anything about it, though, usually because I judge that *me *saying anything about it would also be unproductive or counterproductive. That is not to say that someone else, someone who is different from myself, cannot effectively say something to the situation.

Some remarks require no refutation, defense, or comment. The poster undoes themselves by their very unreasonableness. But in some situations like that, it is a good idea (in my view) to post reasonable information to the thread, even while ignoring the rest of it. If I am angry, though, I don’t post (I hope, anyway).

 

[ralphinal]

But there have been Catholics on this forum that have held that at no time is a Prostestant ever right. Never. No way. Further, in no way shape of form, they hold, is Christ or the Holy Spirit ever present with them. Now, am I wrong for correcting them or am I undermining the process?

 

[mozart-250]

Now I would think that if you want to talk Catholicism in either the Non-catholic Religions or Apologetics forums that you would want to make as much of a convincing case as possible for your faith to the non-Catholics on these forums. Just saying…

First and foremost you must watch your tone and attitude. Are you all convinced by Jack Chick tracts? Then understand defending your faith in an attitude of arrogance and condescension will not convince non Catholics of anything.

You are the ones that are claiming that only your denomination is the true church of Jesus Christ. Those are lofty claims, and quite frankly they should not be believed unless the claims of a superior faith are equally matched by a superior lifestyle.

Now I know it is not fair to any faith to judge it by nuts talking about it over the internet, but still some of you by your demeanor undermine your own objectives here.

 

[Cathdefender]

But there have been Catholics on this forum that have held that at no time is a Prostestant ever right. Never. No way. Further, in no way shape of form, they hold, is Christ or the Holy Spirit ever present with them. Now, am I wrong for correcting them or am I undermining the process?

This is tough to answer considering Protestants are following a bible that is not like our bible in original form. They don’t follow anything that is original (meaning from the start of the compilation of anything christian). They do however believe in Jesus the Messiah, but that is all we have in common. Nothing more.

 

[ralphinal]

This is tough to answer considering Protestants are following a bible that is not like our bible in original form. They don’t follow anything that is original (meaning from the start of the compilation of anything christian). They do however believe in Jesus the Messiah, but that is all we have in common. Nothing more.

But the EO Bible is not like ours, either. And they claim that we do not follow the original faith as well.

Believing that Jesus is Messiah encompasses a lot of things. That leads to a great deal that we have in common.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Now I would think that if you want to talk Catholicism in either the Non-catholic Religions or Apologetics forums that you would want to make as much of a convincing case as possible for your faith to the non-Catholics on these forums. Just saying…

First and foremost you must watch your tone and attitude. Are you all convinced by Jack Chick tracts? Then understand defending your faith in an attitude of arrogance and condescension will not convince non Catholics of anything.

You are the ones that are claiming that only your denomination is the true church of Jesus Christ. Those are lofty claims, and quite frankly they should not be believed unless the claims of a superior faith are equally matched by a superior lifestyle.

Now I know it is not fair to any faith to judge it by nuts talking about it over the internet, but still some of you by your demeanor undermine your own objectives here.

“I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.”
Saint Augustine (354-430), Against the Letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D…

 

[Cathdefender]

But the EO Bible is not like ours, either. And they claim that we do not follow the original faith as well.

Believing that Jesus is Messiah encompasses a lot of things. That leads to a great deal that we have in common.

But they can claim whatever they want. The EO and everyone else has gotten their bibles from the Catholic church. period.

 

[ralphinal]

But they can claim whatever they want. The EO and everyone else has gotten their bibles from the Catholic church. period.

Just playing the other side…
They say that we got the Bible from them. Why would four leave one, they ask. It is a matter of perception. Once, we were unified. Then, we divided. Now, we are fragmented. How can it be fixed?

 

[reteeks21]

Are there people here at CAF, Catholics and non-Catholics that for the sake of ecumenicalism, are compromising their own faith?

At what point does compromise equal rejection of ones own faith?

Why do some here consider a vigorous defense of ones faith as being “uncharitable”, to a person of another faith?

This whole question asserts that we are of two different faiths, doesn’t it? Or is that the point you were trying to make?

 

[Cathdefender]

This whole question asserts that we are of two different faiths, doesn’t it? Or is that the point you were trying to make?

Of course we are…more than one faith .

 

[JonNC]

Are there people here at CAF, Catholics and non-Catholics that for the sake of ecumenicalism, are compromising their own faith?

At what point does compromise equal rejection of ones own faith?

Why do some here consider a vigorous defense of ones faith as being “uncharitable”, to a person of another faith?

Jimmy,
Just a couple of comments after reading the posts here.

1. Most of the posters on this thread are the people I enjoy conversing with. They defend their faith, usually with charity, including you, Jimmy.
2. I think it possible to come to levels of agreement without compromising one’s faith. For example: The Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification. Their are some Catholics and Lutherans who claim their leaders caved. But on the whole, I think this is an instance of the Holy Spirit bridging the gap of division. And where one bridge is built, others can follow. While defending our faith, we must continue to be open to the guidance of the HS.
3. I will and have confronted other non-catholics on this site when I believe they are wrong, either in doctrine but especially in demeanor. I don’t believe in my side, right or wrong. I try to do it with charity, and I commend others, Catholics or noncatholics who do the same.

Jon

 

[Catherine_S]

Well, try speaking to people who defame your bible, who** curse Jesus** and say he isn’t real, show me then your kindness. Very difficult.

*More than difficult! *
B**e kind to yourself and stay away from these folks :yup:
“Do not give to dogs what is holy; and do not throw your pearls before swine lest they trample them under foot and turn to attack you” Matt:7- 6
.

 

[ralphinal]

Is it fair or acceptable for a Catholic to say/beleive that a non-Catholic is going to hell because they are non-Catholic?

Can we say that non-Catholic churches are tools of the devil?

Can we say that the souls of all non-Catholics are in real danger of being lost because they are non-Catholic?

 

[JonNC]

Ralph,

Is it fair or acceptable for a Catholic to say/beleive that a non-Catholic is going to hell because they are non-Catholic?

No more so than when non-catholics say/believe Catholics are condemned. We should all leave that to God.

Can we say that non-Catholic churches are tools of the devil?

No more so than n-C’s saying/believing the “Whore of Babylon” baloney.

Can we say that the souls of all non-Catholics are in real danger of being lost because they are non-Catholic?

Now, that you can say, in part because Catholic teaching says our orders, therefore our confession and Eucharist are invalid. I don’t agree, but you can say it, and we can discuss it. Also, it is not a definitive statement, leaving the decision to God.

Jon

 

[ralphinal]

Ralph,

No more so than when non-catholics say/believe Catholics are condemned. We should all leave that to God.

Agree. Then why do we do it?

No more so than n-C’s saying/believing the “Whore of Babylon” baloney.

Agree. then why do we do it/

Now, that you can say, in part because Catholic teaching says our orders, therefore our confession and Eucharist are invalid. I don’t agree, but you can say it, and we can discuss it. Also, it is not a definitive statement, leaving the decision to God.

Jon

Agree. It can be discussed and should be, but we must always remmember that we cannot judge man’s heart.

 

[JonNC]

Agree. Then why do we do it?

I think it is human pride!! “What I believe has to be better than what you believe, because I’m right and you’re wrong.”
How un-Christlike for all of us to be this way!

I also think it is a matter of 500 years of distrust, mutual condemnations, and a gradual growth in the difference of our “languages” - what our meanings of words like faith, salvation, etc. have come to be over this long period of time. This is why I believe that if we are open to the HS, He can help us to overcome these differences that are often more semantics than beliefs, and not compromise our faith.

Jon

 

[ralphinal]

I think it is human pride!! “What I believe has to be better than what you believe, because I’m right and you’re wrong.”
How un-Christlike for all of us to be this way!

I also think it is a matter of 500 years of distrust, mutual condemnations, and a gradual growth in the difference of our “languages” - what our meanings of words like faith, salvation, etc. have come to be over this long period of time. This is why I believe that if we are open to the HS, He can help us to overcome these differences that are often more semantics than beliefs, and not compromise our faith.

Jon

Good point.