Christian Identity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bonnie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bonnie

Guest
A parishioner started coming to our Catechism study a month or so ago. This Sunday he started spouting stuff that I recognized - at least in part - as Christian Identity garbage (my dh is working on my tact! :D)

We explained Catholic doctrine - only 1 creation of man, not 2, Cain really being the son of Adam, numerology not reliable, etc. - but he insisted that his was an acceptable interpretation of Scripture since the Church has infallibly defined only a few verses in the Bible.

Is there another way to refute his false ideas besides “the Church says so”? I think that’s adequate, but he doesn’t. Unfortunately, he didn’t join earlier when we started, since we did start with the profession of faith, creation, etc. We don’t want to derail the study by going back to the beginning just for him.

All suggestions welcome! (And no, I didn’t call his ideas garbage to his face, but I did get pretty hot under the collar.)
 
It’s also known as British Israelism. White people are the chosen of God, people of color are descended from Cain & are outside God’s grace. This guy came up with one I hadn’t heard before - God created Adam & Eve, then later created Cain as a son of the devil. He also included angels having sexual relations with people. That’s how giants, such as Goliath came about.

There are quite a number of Christian Identity believers in this area. One converted a few years ago & joined the Church. He’s a wonderful Catholic - very enthusiastic & one of my favorite people!

This other guy (I’ll call him A) is a life-long Catholic. I suspect he hadn’t been to Mass in a while. Either that, or he’s been watching the wrong shows & talking with the wrong people.
 
Thank you for the info.Sounds like neo-nazi,aryan brotherhood and kkk teaching.
 
Luke 10:16 (English Standard Version)

Jesus Sends Out His Seventy Two Disciples
"The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me."
Click to expand...
Bonnie…ask your fellow parishioner if he believes what Jesus says in the Gospel of Luke…2000 years ago…today…and until the end of time…specifically in Luke 10:16…? If the answer is no…then what he is really saying is (forgive me as I paraphrase Prof Peter Kreeft, Boston College…again):Ah, excuse me Jesus…but I believe that you are sitting on my throne!
**
or
**
Ah, excuse me Saint Peter (Pope Benedict XVI)…but I believe that you are sitting in my Chair!

Regarding his interpretation of the Bible…refer him to CCC 375 & 404
**375 **The Church, interpreting the symbolism of biblical language in an authentic way, in the light of the New Testament and Tradition, teaches that our first parents, Adam and Eve, were constituted in an original “state of holiness and justice”. This grace of original holiness was “to share in. . .divine life”.
Click to expand...
**404 **
Click to expand...
How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”. By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

I would suggest to him that he not bother about the “Catholic” identity label he hangs on himself…there are many other Christian denominations (sounds like more that a few in your area) that will allow him to have his own “Chair” of teaching authority and infallibility…the Roman Catholic Church is simply not one of them.

So I would not argue or discuss it…other than to DEMAND that he provide an official Church document (CCC, encyclical, Counsel, etc.) that says what he says/supports his position…if not…his case is closed. Also, remind him that Jesus is not “white”…he is Semitic…even as he sits at the “right hand” of the Father in heaven at this very moment…he is not “white”!

Pax Christi
 
Thanks!

Another member of our group - who I had thought had his head on straight - made the claim that Jews - & therefor Jesus - are white. He was more amenable to correction.

“A” claims to be coming to the study because he wants to learn the Catholic position. But if he argues any more - he’s out! We will also tell him to take home a CCC & study it. I’m pretty sure he doesn’t own one.

I find the Christian Identity position very offensive because my family is what is now called “multi-cultural.” So is my circle of friends. For that matter, our priest is VERY black - from Nigeria!

It didn’t occur to me at the time, but if it comes up again I might ask if he thinks Fr. Peter is irredeemably evil.
 
Christian Identity? Poo-poo! how dare they but the moniker "christian’ on such hate filled tripe as they spew out of their poisoned orifices.:mad:
 
What about "A"s assertion that his interpretations of Scripture are just as good as the Church’s because the Church has not infallibly defined most of the Bible? I’ve heard similar claims before & would like to know a good way to refute it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top