Catholic? Now, I am not sure

[paziego]

1. The greatest theologians and philosophers in history have been Catholic.

I am sorry but that is not true. Plato, Aristotle, the Hellenistic philosophers, the Neo-Platonists, Hume, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Descartes (was not writing as a Catholic even if he was French), Hegel, Averroes (who was the inspiration of Aquinas), John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, the list goes on. None of them Catholic.

As for the theologians, you can say that all the greatest *Catholic *theologians were catholic, but you have to give credit where it is due to Maimonides and the Islamic theologians of the middle ages whom the Catholics engaged with and learned from. Indian philosophy and theology is very advanced as well, but I don’t know enough to comment.

I know Catholicism has St Augustine, who received his intellectual training from Neo-Platonists and Manicheans. They also have Aquinas, who just adopted Aristotle’s philosophy and grafted it onto Christianity, even if this didn’t work very well (he argues the foetus is not a human being, which no Catholic today would accept). St Thomas Moore made a more modest contribution, but you can include him among the Catholic philosophers.

 

[Wa_Michael]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

(1) How many Catholics are there (i) in the world, but (ii) in this forum (to make it “easy” for you);

(2) How many of them do you know? [both (i) and (ii)];

(3) How many of those you know have you ever heard or read their works? [both (i) and (ii)]

(4) How many homilies of your Bishop or your Parish Priest have you “heard” and “understood”? (closest apologists!!)

(5) How much useful is your understanding of those teachings in defending your Faith?

Just five, for now!

 

[Micosil]

I am sorry but that is not true. Plato, Aristotle, the Hellenistic philosophers, the Neo-Platonists, Hume, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Descartes (was not writing as a Catholic even if he was French), Hegel, Averroes (who was the inspiration of Aquinas), John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, the list goes on. None of them Catholic.

All of these may have been non-Catholic and perhaps key figures in philosophy, but the point here is to present intellectuals that happened to be Catholic to show jaimelopez that Catholics also count a substantial amount of intellectuals and gifted apologists among their ranks.

As for the theologians, you can say that all the greatest *Catholic *theologians were catholic, but you have to give credit where it is due to Maimonides and the Islamic theologians of the middle ages whom the Catholics engaged with and learned from. Indian philosophy and theology is very advanced as well, but I don’t know enough to comment.

It is true that Aquinas was influenced by people like Maimonides up to a point. But the correlation can only be taken so far. In particular, we must remember that men like Maimonides were themselves influenced by Aristotle. There also seems to be evidence that Maimonides himself was influenced by Christian though, as contemporary Jewish scholars of his time note. (Kries, Friar Thomas, p. 102). Furthermore, some of Maimonides’ theology, which was apophatic (or negative) in nature was already being used by Eastern Christians centuries before Maimonides arrived on the scene. To finish, it seems Maimonides greatest influence on Aquinas was as far as the interpretation of Old Testament Law is concerned (Hood, Aquinas, p. 41; Juan Fernando Chamorro, “La nueva y ley antigua en Santo Tomás”, Studium 7, 1967, p. 369); so given all this, I’m not sure it’s fair to say Maimonides should be given that much credit.

I know Catholicism has St Augustine, who received his intellectual training from Neo-Platonists and Manicheans. They also have Aquinas, who just adopted Aristotle’s philosophy and grafted it onto Christianity, even if this didn’t work very well (he argues the foetus is not a human being, which no Catholic today would accept). St Thomas Moore made a more modest contribution, but you can include him among the Catholic philosophers.

:tsktsk:

catholic.com/quickquestions/did-st-thomas-aquinas-believe-ensoulment-occurred-40-or-80-days-after-conception-maki

The 40/80-day view is based on the writings of Aristotle, who said a child becomes human at “formation,” the point at which it first “has a human form”–that is, when it looks human. He said this was 40 days for boys and 80 days for girls. Probably this distinction was based on the point at which genitals could be observed on miscarried children. Keep in mind that fetal embryology was then a restricted science; all observations could be made only by the naked eye, the microscope being in the distant future.

Aquinas accepted the idea of formation, which he said occurs when a child receives a soul. But since abortion violates natural law whether or not the child has a soul, Aquinas taught that abortion is always gravely wrong.

Aquinas was wrong on a scientific statement (that a distinct human being’s life begins at conception is a scientific statement backed up by multiple sources), but his morality on when abortion is permissible (that is to say, never) is fine.

 

[fred_conty]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

I think you would find listening to Catholic Radio an interesting way to a variety of Catholic thought which may be controversial in today’s world. Also EWTN tv which also furnishes an assortment of Catholic ideas explained.

I know it can be hard to see friends turn from you because of your Catholic belief. And when it happens we benefit so much by turning to Christ and asking him for his peace and love to support us. Those are the times of great grace when we do it from love for him.

I will remember you in prayer.

 

[Church_Militant]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

How do you figure that?

James white’s doctrine is all based on Sola Scriptura which is a false doctrine even by its own standards since it’s nowhere in the Bible.
It’s NOT in the Bible, okay?
It’s NOT in the Bible, okay? (Part II)
“If anyone teaches/preaches something that is not in scripture”

Also, if he’s so squared away why did his own sister convert?

Debates don’t really mean much and if you think the Catholics all lost then you probably don’t know your own faith as well as you should.

 

[Church_Militant]

Why aren’t we always debating? Probably because we don’t need to. As Arch Bishop Fulton Sheen said.
**“The Catholic faith is like a lion in a cage. You don’t need to defend it - you simply need to open the cage door.”

**BTW, here’s one we won.
**Faith and Works in Justification

**People make you feel bad about being Catholic? Not me Brother. Take a look at the link to my blog in my sig like below. And then of course there’s My Testimony

 

[jaimelopez]

Hi ,Jaime.
Is this something that is.going on where you live ?

nO. Protestant here are not clever. Here is pretty simple, however there’s not anybody who defend the Faith clearly

Just asking cause I read you are Nicaragüense.

yes, I am

And this urge to get good dabaters sounds kind of odd for us Latin Americans…it is sort of a different style…
Just wondering ,Jaime

It’s not about style it is about skills, I guess I need to study more and no more debates until I have a good undertanding about my Faith otherwise I’ll lose my Faith

 

[Goya]

How do you figure that?

James white’s doctrine is all based on Sola Scriptura which is a false doctrine even by its own standards since it’s nowhere in the Bible.
It’s NOT in the Bible, okay?
It’s NOT in the Bible, okay? (Part II)
“If anyone teaches/preaches something that is not in scripture”

Also, if he’s so squared away why did his own sister convert?

Debates don’t really mean much and if you think the Catholics all lost then you probably don’t know your own faith as well as you should.

 

[Goya]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

Ok, so I’ve had to self-edit a few times here, to keep my comments about James White “charitable”–(which is to say, I’ve eliminated any/all comments about him).

I’ll just say this, about the questions you pose:

Debating itself, is naturally inclined to favor Protestantism, because they’ve conveniently (and without authority) reduced 2000 years of the Faith, to the Bible (begging the question–where in the Bible does it claim to be the totality of the Faith? Where in the Bible did Christ ever even prophesy a thing called a Bible (let alone its primacy)? Where in the Bible does it prophesy a divide as significant as the Reformation?–NB: this is extremely significant, because the NT is a reflection of the OT; it is the fulfillment of the OT prophesies. the Church is prophesied, as is the promise of the Holy Spirit eternally accompanying her. The Bible is gift of the Holy Spirit to His Spouse, the Church; the Holy Spirit/advocate/Paraclete WAS prophesied; not the Bible, not Sola Scriptura’, and certainly not a division as significant as the Reformation…note, Christ never even wrote anything down–not a single solitary word–yet from that, we supposedly get a Faith that is reduced to a book (or more accurately, a collection of books)? But Christ did hand pick 12 Apostles (to be expressly contrasted with His disciples, who comprised a larger group of which the former was a subset), and instructed them in the Faith; he taught them…and instructed to do the same…He then sent them His Holy Spirit at the Pentecost to enlighten and inspire them…IOW, he founded a Church–His Church…

…I digress…

The point is that Catholicism is a synthesis of a multitude of sources, all through the Holy Spirit; her doctrines are culled and refined through invoking the Holy Spirit, in prayer, over 2000 years of real challenges to the Church.

A key example is the Council of Trent. After Martin Luther had posted his 95 theses, and commenced his revolution, the Church convened a Council–a gathering of all the Bishops of the world who were duly appointed according to Apostolic Succession (i.e.–the Apostles appointed/ordained their own successors, who did the same, on down the line—each requiring at least 2 other such similarly appointed bishops to confirm their appointment as such). Martin Luther was invited to present his case to the Church (in fact, the ‘party’ was held in his honor). Martin Luther declined to attend, at all.

So the Council invoked the Holy Spirit in humble and sincere prayer–and considered Luther’s contentions in his absence, against existing Church Doctrine and Tradition–and confirmed most of her existing beliefs, but did engage in some reforms (what is wrongly known as the ‘counter-Reformation’–it was THE Reformation).

But the mere fact that Martin Luther cowered from the scrutiny of the Holy Spirit over the Church that Christ founded, is all you need to know about the so called Reformation. If he had Truth on his side, surely he would have been there with bells and whistles (in stark contrast, and by way of counter example, consider St. Joan of Arc, and so many other martyrs, who died in the name of Truth).

Alas, what he had in his heart, must not have been Truth–but something far less honorable.

TBL: the key to defending your faith, is in history.

2000 years of history is hard to explain in 20 second gotcha’ sound bites.

But then the Faith isn’t about smack talk and gotcha moments–it’s about Truth.

FWIW.

 

[graciew]

nO. Protestant here are not clever. Here is pretty simple, however there’s not anybody who defend the Faith clearly

yes, I am
It’s not about style it is about skills, I guess I need to study more and no more debates until I have a good undertanding about my Faith otherwise I’ll lose my Faith

No you won ’ t ! We are a Marian people ,Jaime and fresh flowers from our garden at her feet and a Hail Mary with much love reach Her Son at the speed of light even without words…
Ask Her to hold your faith as She held Baby Jesus in Her arms. I will pray for you.
We do not always need to explain our hearts ,Jaime. We are all different and whatever our skills are ,no matter how simple ,they can be our everyday song to the Lord.
Enjoy the beauty around you and my prayers from a.sister from down south of the world.( who can also be a monkey with a razor debating !jajaja)
God bless you ,Jaime !!

 

[e_c]

Jaime - Count the number of debates noted in the New Testament. Record who won, or if there was a winner at all. Bring your results here to discuss.

 

[thistle]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

Is this a joke? Is your faith so weak it depend son someone being a good debater

 

[e_c]

And we are supposed to “be patient with the scruples of those whose faith is weak,” not deride them.

Jaime - Realize that one’s power of persuasive speech is not an indicator of truth. You and I would lose debates with Hitler on politics, for instance, but we would still have the truth. Jesus did not persuade everyone either, remember… Nor did Peter, Paul, etc.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

Keep in mind that many of these debates are set up by the non-Catholics and the non-Catholic debater gets the last word. Someone does (need to get the last word) so the debate can move forward. Giving the non-Catholic the last word will put the Catholic debater at a disadvantage which is hardly fair; I understand that this is why some Catholic apologists won’t debate at all and others participate infrequently.

For what it’s worth, some Baptist friends who wanted to learn what the Catholic church really taught bought videos with Fr. Mitch Pacwa. The were impressed with his answers and knowledge but also his approach. He’s very intellectual but he also leads with humility which earned their respect. I wish I could say they became Catholic but they are still Baptist but also some of the most Catholic-friendly Baptists you’ll ever meet.

 

[CatholicRaven]

How do you know you are a good figther? Fighting how do you know you have the stronger arguments? Debating.

False.
How do you know you have good debate skills? Debating.
How do you know you have the stronger arguments? Experience and knowledge. And, often, faith.

Debates don’t really bring out facts, logic, or truth–they simply show who can argue better. Think about that for a second. It’s not about the arguments, it’s about the person’s skill at making an argument sound convincing (and making their opponent sound less convincing). Many Protestant debaters also appeal to emotion. If they can make you feel their passion, you’re more likely to agree with them, even if you know in your head that their facts are wrong.

I’ve seen it happen. I took debate class in high school. I was friends with some students who were excellent debaters, very convincing, scored lots of points at competitions. The funny thing is, many times, the best debaters were assigned the “side” of the debate with which they did not actually agree. They often “won” the debate, but they didn’t even convince themselves that the position they were defending was the correct one! So why did they win? Because they knew how to use rhetoric to their advantage.

So I learned that it’s possible to win a debate without even believing what you are saying. I learned not to assume that something is true simply because it sounds good or appeals to my emotions. It has to be backed up with something more.

When I began looking into the teachings of the Catholic Church, I found (to my surprise) that Catholicism was backed up with faith, reason, evidence, Scripture, and Tradition. And, most importantly of all, the authority of Jesus Christ.

That’s why I am Catholic.

Because no matter how I feel about it, I know it’s true.

 

[steve_b]

I have seen many debates and in all ones catholics have lost, pretty sad. We don’t have any good debater. The true Church? How if we can’t defend it? james white k’s.o. Catholicism in all debates, so Why be a Catholic?

James White ko’s Catholicism?

 

[steve_b]

??? Am I kidding? Brother, this is sad, you think I am kidding?

Well, Why aren’t they debating? they have william lane craig, james white, you are kidding me? our priests are not clever. Always That I see a priest or another catholic being asked about our faith, they can’t answer well but look at William Lane Craig, look james white woow. anyone? I don’t know he has a lot of debates but He does ko all catholics.

Books books books, I am talking about debates, anybody could write a book, I want to see arguments to be defended.

Augustine? Aquinas? Catherine of Siena? Ignatius of Loyola? Therese of Liseux? Newman?
1ke;13687965:

Or Kreeft? Sheed? Belloc? Keating? Newman? John Paul II? Benedict XVI? Hahn? von Hildebrand? Hardon? Sheen? Have you ever seen those persons in a debate? Keating lost

Look. If you say you have Truth and you cannot defend it against other views, guess what? nobody will belive your truth.

Give an exact example. What charge did White make that wasn’t answered? Be specific.

 

[steve_b]

I’ve read arguments, they look good in paper but what happens in a debate? you get it?

Well show me who that person is that can argue better? Chesterton is not here.
Don’t anyone get angry, I am just sad because I can’t defend my faith, nobody can and cults and liberalism and anticatholicism go ahead

Jesus and His “followers” had a bit of a debate going on between them

John 6:46-68

Note: did Jesus lose the argument with THEM?.

His “followers” left Him saying who could listen to this. Jesus gave them answers to their questions…right? They however, weren’t buying it. Imagine THAT? Was Jesus a bad apologist? The ONE standing in front of THEM speaking face to face, is the same ONE who spoke in the beginning and all that is, came into being. The same ONE, now giving the bread of life discourse to these unbelievers. There was some back and forth debate between them and Jesus, but Jesus didn’t / couldn’t convince them. WHY? Because they didn’t have faith… * [65]* But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him.

So Jesus let them go. He didn’t go after them, He didn’t force Himself on them or force His way on them.

So why did Jesus even waste time on these guys? He knew in advance, they didn’t believe even before He started addressing them. So why even waste His breath on them knowing the outcome?

How about To show us, what we are to do when we don’t win every debate. God gives everyone a chance, and gives everyone first right of refusal. No one can say at the end of life, even those guys who left, that God didn’t give them a chance. They made their choice. A bad choice but a free choice just the same. Even if it means visually and in print, that Jesus appears to look like He “lost” the debate. Free will is HUGE. It is what makes us all culpable in the end, for what we do…or don’t do…freely. Those guys freely walked away. If they stayed away, they’re screwed.

As Aquinas said

**“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”

And there you have it. White is represented by the guys who walked away from Jesus and the Eucharist in that debate. You think White wins?

**BTW, did you know White’s sister converted to Catholicism? catholic-convert.com/blog/2009/02/18/patty-bonds-her-father-her-mother-and-her-brother-james-white/

 

[steve_b]

??? Am I kidding? Brother, this is sad, you think I am kidding?

Well, Why aren’t they debating? they have william lane craig, james white, you are kidding me? our priests are not clever. Always That I see a priest or another catholic being asked about our faith, they can’t answer well but look at William Lane Craig, look james white woow. anyone? I don’t know he has a lot of debates but He does ko all catholics.

Books books books, I am talking about debates, anybody could write a book, I want to see arguments to be defended.

Augustine? Aquinas? Catherine of Siena? Ignatius of Loyola? Therese of Liseux? Newman?

Look. If you say you have Truth and you cannot defend it against other views, guess what? nobody will belive your truth.

Who did White KO?

What was the topic? How did White get the KO ?

 

[Wa_Michael]

It’s not about style it is about skills, I guess I need to study more and no more debates until I have a good undertanding about my Faith otherwise I’ll lose my Faith

It is not understanding that matters in the fact that we believe, but grace. We believe in order to understand, and not vise versa.