ELCA and Catholic Unity (?)

[GKC]

Originally Posted by commenter View Post
Read the book “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton.

I am sure only a tiny percentage of people today have been shaped by Lea’s books. But a huge percentage have been shaped directly by Chesterton, or their teachers and mentors were shaped by his books. This is especially true of Catholics, Anglicans, LCMS, evangelicals, and many others, who usually don’t know who Chesterton was, but his arguments are half of all their assumptions. I was influenced by Chesterton before I recall reading his name, because in hindsight I see that my textbooks, teachers, and favorite authors were. Chesterton didn’t invent these arguments, but expressed in readable form what writers before and after him usually hint at, or take for granted.

You have written an awful lot of posts challenging various aspects of Catholic doctrine. Your challenges aren’t that challenging because you usually aren’t asking the sharpest possible questions, and you likely don’t know the assumptions the other posters are implicitly responding to. Well, the book “Orthodoxy” will help you better understand William F. Buckley, Martin Luther King, Winston Churchill, and lots of others; and, also, most of what Catholics and Protestants on CAF rightly or wrongly take for granted in their posts here.

I am not saying you have to agree with those arguments that became our assumptions, but wouldn’t you be curious to know what they are? Even for the purpose of refutation?

When I began reading Chesterton, roughly 52 years ago, I was nothing particular, as to religion. Not the Baptist I was raised, for sure. But then I found a few Chestertons. Starting with ORTHODOXY. And was quickly copying lines, and paras and chapters, in long hand (copiers were primitive, in the day). And Lewis followed shortly, and Belloc, Knox, Sayers, Tolkien, Lunn, Dawson, and on and on. (Leas are in there. And you should see my collection of signed Buckleys. The Churchills belong to my wife.) And I became the stupor mundi I am today, from books. Well, mostly from books.

Books are good. I recommend trying a wide variety.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

I am not saying you have to agree with those arguments that became our assumptions, but wouldn’t you be curious to know what they are? Even for the purpose of refutation?

We can argue endlessly, and where will that get us?

I have come to understand; that millions of people have come to Christ, through many denominations and over many centuries. We just have to accept that the Catholic church does not have a monopoly, if we did, then these denominations would not exist.

If we cannot change them, then we should reach out in loving kindness, that we may be as ‘One’, as Jesus is as ‘One’ with the Father.

I can remember on one occasion going out door knocking in the style of the JWs. It was a Churches Together event, I was paired up with an Anglican, and after praying we went out together, we had about ten minutes to get to know each other before knocking on the first door.

At the first door, he introduced himself as John from the Anglican Church, And I said I was Eric from the Catholic church. People seemed genuinely interested, that a Catholic and Anglican should be together, and they were asking us questions.

I can only say it was a profound experience, I truthfully believe we would not have had so much interest; if we were two Catholics doing the same.

 

[Tomdstone]

Originally Posted by commenter View Post
Read the book “Orthodoxy” by G. K. Chesterton.

I am sure only a tiny percentage of people today have been shaped by Lea’s books. But a huge percentage have been shaped directly by Chesterton, or their teachers and mentors were shaped by his books. This is especially true of Catholics, Anglicans, LCMS, evangelicals, and many others, who usually don’t know who Chesterton was, but his arguments are half of all their assumptions. I was influenced by Chesterton before I recall reading his name, because in hindsight I see that my textbooks, teachers, and favorite authors were. Chesterton didn’t invent these arguments, but expressed in readable form what writers before and after him usually hint at, or take for granted.

You have written an awful lot of posts challenging various aspects of Catholic doctrine. Your challenges aren’t that challenging because you usually aren’t asking the sharpest possible questions, and you likely don’t know the assumptions the other posters are implicitly responding to. Well, the book “Orthodoxy” will help you better understand William F. Buckley, Martin Luther King, Winston Churchill, and lots of others; and, also, most of what Catholics and Protestants on CAF rightly or wrongly take for granted in their posts here.

I am not saying you have to agree with those arguments that became our assumptions, but wouldn’t you be curious to know what they are? Even for the purpose of refutation?

FYI, I already read the book.

 

[GKC]

FYI, I already read the book.

That is good. Keep going.

 

[Tomdstone]

We can argue endlessly, and where will that get us?.

In mathematics it gets us to the truth. For example, a serious study and discussion of of isosceles triangles will get us to conclude that in Euclidean geometry, the base angles of an isosceles triangle are equal.

 

[Tomdstone]

You have written an awful lot of posts challenging various aspects of Catholic doctrine.

What specific Roman Catholic doctrine have I challenged?

 

[Eric_Hyom]

In mathematics it gets us to the truth.

We are all created by ‘One God’ and the truth is, that the same God hears all our prayers, despite our differences.

And the prayer of Jesus, that they may be ‘One’ as we are ‘One’.

The beauty of mathematics, pure and simple.

 

[Peter_J]

Originally Posted by commenter
G. K. Chesterton: "The difficulty of explaining “why I am a Catholic” is that there are ten thousand reasons all amounting to one reason: that Catholicism is true…

This question wasn’t addressed to me but I’d like to ask, to get a better idea of where you’re coming from, wouldn’t protestants say pretty much the same thing? I.e. “I am Lutheran/Anglican/Methodist/etc because Lutheranism/Anglicanism/Methodism/etc is true.”

 

[Eric_Hyom]

This question wasn’t addressed to me but I’d like to ask, to get a better idea of where you’re coming from, wouldn’t protestants say pretty much the same thing? I.e. “I am Lutheran/Anglican/Methodist/etc because Lutheranism/Anglicanism/Methodism/etc is true.”

We can all claim truth, but there is only one Jesus Christ, our division does not make sense.