How many Catholics think this way?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sepharad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sepharad said:
As the OP, I want to say that I started this thread originally because of some grave concern I had from reading some threads on the Traditionalist forum…threads that seemed to indicate that at least some Catholics pined and hoped to work for the days when the Catholic church could take over and compel others to become Catholics.

The thread got sidetracked, as threads often do…but my original intent was to find out just how widespread this mentality is.
Click to expand...
But you’ve gone on about this for MONTHS already! I will no longer subscribe to this thread as long as you keep rehashing the same thing over and over and over again. It needs to stop immediately.
 
I agree her original concern has been answered four times over I am also unsubscribing from this thread. I am outta here
peary said:
But you’ve gone on about this for MONTHS already! I will no longer subscribe to this thread as long as you keep rehashing the same thing over and over and over again. It needs to stop immediately.
Click to expand...
 
Well I’ll keep it simple.

Only the Truth has the right to exist.

Everything else does not.

In their sick little minds ok. But prostituting their ideas NO! :mad:
 
Kaninchen said:
We should, of course, remember that the definition of ‘socialist’ (‘communist’ or ‘Marxist’) often used here is from the ‘American Conservative Dictionary’ and is therefore things like:
  1. has a cousin who was once seen reading the New York Times; and
  2. once thought of voting for a Democrat as dog-catcher.
Click to expand...
Yes it does depend on your definition of socialist or Marxist doesn’t it? There is no doubt that Sinn Fein are a left wing party. That largely due to the fact that the vast majority of their electorate are the underpriviledged. I suppose in some people’s book that makes them Marxist. I don’t know anyone here in Northern Ireland thinks of them as Marxist. Maybe some do. But to come back to the thread, those considered their ‘enemies’ are those who support union with Britain and maintenance of the border Catholic or Protestant. It’s a long story how religion got mixed in with the political arguements here and I’m sure everyone could do without the history lesson. I once said to a secularist who promotes integraded education and wants get rid of all faith schools, that if you removed religion entirely from Northern Ireland and created a completely atheistic society, you would still have die hard loyalists and hard line Republicans to contend with due to political divisions.
 
Yes it has. In my last post I tried to bring it back but to the original question. But I can’t resist one last comment on your excellent post which explains things very accurately. 👍 However, I think Sinn Fein voted against the new legislation in Northern Ireland that would allow abortion by the back door. They where however very quiet about the issue until it became very clear the vast majority of people here where opposed to it, and being political camelions…:rolleyes: Many Catholics in the North don’t particuarly like Sinn Fein but vote for them for the reasons you state and as you say, with reservations.
 
minkymurph said:
What does the modern IRA believe in? Didn’t you know the IRA doesn’t exist anymore? :rotfl:

The Workers Party which evolved from the Official IRA in the sixties are a socialist party. I wouldn’t call them Marxist although some would. They are very much for the working classes and their political ideology in the sixties was pretty much along the thinking of Connolly, a leader in the Easter Uprising. Connolly was a Marxist and he believed there could never be a social revolution in Ireland as socialism was eclipsed by Nationalism and Loyalism. The Northern Ireland government were mostly made up of affluent, Protestant businnessmen who threw the Protestant working classes the odd bone to keep them on side. It was believed that uniting the Protestant and Catholic working classes, a political settlement could be found which caused a split and the Provisional IRA formed.

The Provisional IRA had a deep distrust of politicians, wonder why that is, :rolleyes: and wanted to continue the ‘armed struggle’ to remove the border and end British occupation. It was also believed the then leader of the IRA was taking them down a Marxist route and many in the IRA where still actually very Catholic and where often referred to as ‘Rosary rattlers.’ They retaliated by labelling the Official IRA the ‘rusty guns.’ Sinn Fein was the political wing of the Provisional IRA and when they entered the political area, there was another split and there are Republicans who still believe the ‘armed struggle’ is the only way to acheive their political objectives; an end to British occupation and removal of the border.

The political ideology of Sinn Fein has always been pretty obscure. They are pretty much a secular party but personally I think they embrace whatever’s popular irrespective of what it may be if it suits their purpose. Their political objective is still and end to British occupation and removal of the border but they’ve never really let us in on the secret of how the country should be governed if there was a United Ireland. They did have some political ideology at one time of four states in Ireland based on the four provinces, but it was totally unrealistic. They would see the Southern political parties as traitors and therefore want to see the way Ireland is governed completely overhauled. I think as many others do, that Gerry has his eyes on a United Ireland with him at the head. I don’t think he has a hope but then he is an idealist in my opinion and stranger things have happened. Perhaps my Southern counterpart could shed more light on that.
Click to expand...
How did the events of 9-11 in 2001 in the USA affect them? Aren’t they allies with anyone or did I miss that?
 
dessert said:
How did the events of 9-11 in 2001 in the USA affect them? Aren’t they allies with anyone or did I miss that?
Click to expand...
Not sure I know what you mean. Do you mean are Sinn Fein allies with anyone and if so, who? Or do you mean Sinn Fein are allies with Moslem extremists? I assume you mean how did 9-11 affect the IRA/Sinn Fein. I believe Martin McGuinness was out in Iraq due to his ‘experience’ in building a peace process in Northern Ireland, to ‘educate’ people on how to acheive peace or something like that. That’s about all I can tell you.
 
minkymurph said:
Not sure I know what you mean. Do you mean are Sinn Fein allies with anyone and if so, who? Yes Or do you mean Sinn Fein are allies with Moslem extremists? Are they? I don’t know much about it. I assume you mean how did 9-11 affect the IRA/Sinn Fein. Yes I believe Martin McGuinness was out in Iraq due to his ‘experience’ in building a peace process in Northern Ireland, to ‘educate’ people on how to acheive peace or something like that. Oh I seeThat’s about all I can tell you.
Click to expand...
Well yes sort of, no I wasn’t thinking they were allies with the Muslims.
 
dessert said:
Well yes sort of, no I wasn’t thinking they were allies with the Muslims.
Click to expand...
It’s a well known fact that in the past, members of the IRA where sent out to countries such as Iraq to ‘train.’ The IRA was also given arms and funding from Lybia. Now there is a peace process so they can’t afford to have those connections or they would be expelled from government. So as you see Sinn Fein are kind of politcal cameleons. Whatever suits at the time. :rolleyes:

To bring it back to the thread again, I don’t believe they where ever into persecuting anyone for their religious beliefs; it was their political opinions that made them enemies. To me the real arguement in Northern Ireland is one of government and not religion but for a whole variety of reasons, religion got mixed in with it. I am not being biased or vindictive when I say this but in my study of Irish History, it was Ulster Protestants that made it about religion and brought the gun back into politics. After having said that, that is history and we are where we are. The past cannot be changed. The future however can.

I have often been accused of being a liberal on this site and a variety of other things because I am very much in favour of religious tolerance and people being allowed to practice their religion freely with the exception of religious beliefs that abuse human rights or insight to hatred. Perhaps what I have said on this forum explains why I hold that view.
 
I remember, back when I spent the summer in Northern Ireland (mid-1980s), I saw a wall mural that showed an IRA terrorist shaking hands with a PLO terrorist. Underneath were the words, “ONE STRUGGLE”.

I’ve also much more recently seen news reports of Loyalist areas of Belfast flying Israeli flags (?), and Nationalist areas flying Palestinian flags.
 
Hi Jharek,

You know, life is strange wirh its twists and turns. At the time I saw that mural (mid-1980s), I was still a non-religious Jew, and a zionist. It really ticked me off, so much so that I took a picture of it to bring back to the States to show people!

But now, as a religious Jew and an anti-zionist, none of it matters. I understand now that someone can be anti-zionist and not be anti-semitic (otherwise I’d have to hate myself, right?)

The zionisy program of propaganda has been very effective, in that they have convinced almost everyone that to be a Jew is to be a zionist, when those who truly understand the nature of zionism will know that is anything but true.

Personally, I see the situation of the Irish as being akin to that of the Palestinians…the Plantation of Ulster involved artificially settling lowland Scots into the six counties of the political boundary of modern Ulster, just as the artificial implantation of secular zionists from Eastern Europe supplanted the native Arabs already there.

I see the same thing going on in Tibet right now, where the Communist Chinese are artificially settling Han Chinese into Tibet to try to drive out the native Tibetans.

It is an old strategy, to put settlers into an area to drive out or breed out the natives, so as to make it easier to take over. My own country did the same with the Native Americans, forcing them to live on reservations.
 
Sepharad said:
Hi Jharek,

You know, life is strange wirh its twists and turns. At the time I saw that mural (mid-1980s), I was still a non-religious Jew, and a zionist. It really ticked me off, so much so that I took a picture of it to bring back to the States to show people!

But now, as a religious Jew and an anti-zionist, none of it matters.That’s Right! I understand now that someone can be anti-zionist and not be anti-semitic (otherwise I’d have to hate myself, right?)**There is somewhere in the bible says we need to like ourselves before we can love others, and it is good you care what is happening to others those of the oppressed and poor and set apart as the native americans, and if you pray about this God will bring someone to your door so you can have a one on one like you have make peace one step at a time 🙂 So this is instead of a pm OK ? How did I do? **

The zionisy program of propaganda has been very effective, in that they have convinced almost everyone that to be a Jew is to be a zionist, when those who truly understand the nature of zionism will know that is anything but true.This is informative as I didn’t know what Zionism is about, it sounds like the Black Panthers etc. groups that are very angry, which is what seems to be there real agenda.

Personally, I see the situation of the Irish as being akin to that of the Palestinians…the Plantation of Ulster involved artificially settling lowland Scots into the six counties of the political boundary of modern Ulster, just as the artificial implantation of secular zionists from Eastern Europe supplanted the native Arabs already there.

I see the same thing going on in Tibet right now, where the Communist Chinese are artificially settling Han Chinese into Tibet to try to drive out the native Tibetans.

It is an old strategy, to put settlers into an area to drive out or breed out the natives, so as to make it easier to take over. My own country did the same with the Native Americans, forcing them to live on reservations.**My husband is part Cherokee we believe but then so are many of us more than likely part Native, what does it matter? Right? I hope you have a blessing today. **
Click to expand...
Why are you "anti " anyways? I am anti - abortion yes, but better to think “pro-life”, No?
 
Sepharad said:
That’s all I was also trying to say…but maybe since you’re Catholic, you are allowed to say it without being judged for it?

The Catholic church has a long history of persecuting those with whom it disagrees (Calvinists, Waldensians, Albigensians, Cathari, Jews, you name it)…and in more modern times, these things are remembered as history.

Likewise, the ancient Israelites did the same thing, against those they regarded as idolaters…and this too, is recalled as history.

The militant Muslims are currently persecuting those who are not Muslims…and someday, they too, will be held to account for it.
Click to expand...
As a Catholic I can be and am judged for my actions. And yes, I can say things about the Church, warts and all that someone not of the Catholic Faith would be censured by fire for saying. But to some Catholics, I too would be seen as a threat. We misunderstand each other too easily. To avoid this, if a person is truly curious about another’s faith, whatever is said should be taken as that, curiosity and not anti this and anti that. We could learn a lot from one another if only people would be more respectful of other’s thoughts and feelings and their love of their own faith. I ask many questions and sometimes come across as being insensitive because I am so blunt. When I ask a question, I want an answer. I am not being judgemental, but many do not see this. So looking at the problem from the other side, yes someone of the same faith can be more easily seen as dialogueing rather than argueing, or judging.

Although it is said the Catholic Church felt it was protecting its legacy from heresy etc. in those long ago times, the punishment for not agreeing with the Church at that time was brutal. I am beginning to wonder though, if each of those persecutions, as seen through the eyes of the persecuted, should be studied individually? This wouldn’t make any of the brutality of the conflicts right, or excuse them, but could perhaps give different slants on why the church acted the way it did in certain instances. I believe that at one time before the church grew larger, the Pope depended upon secular rulers for support. It “could” have been in some instances, the secular rulers leading the way to these suppressions, usually for territory and more wealth. I really need to study the causes of these punishments. I know about the church’s conflicts with the Cathars, the Albigensian “Crusade”, the history of the Catholic Church and the Jews. I am not familiar wth the Church’s conflicts with the Calvanists.

Peace and Blessings.
 
Sepharad said:
The Catholic church has a long history of persecuting those with whom it disagrees (Calvinists, Waldensians, Albigensians, Cathari, Jews, you name it)…and in more modern times, these things are remembered as history.
Click to expand...
the protestants have a long history of persecuting Catholics… but you probably don’t about that since you read Prot versions of history… which is all you get in public schools these days… (& elsewhere). The only reason the Prot persectutions didn’t last as long is cause they haven’t been around as long…

all i can say is i would rather have been persecuted by the Catholics than the Protestants…
 
distracted said:
the protestants have a long history of persecuting Catholics… but you probably don’t about that since you read Prot versions of history… which is all you get in public schools these days… (& elsewhere). The only reason the Prot persectutions didn’t last as long is cause they haven’t been around as long…

all i can say is i would rather have been persecuted by the Catholics than the Protestants…
Click to expand...
Actually, I do not read Protestant versions of history. I have read Jewish and secular versions of history, and also, some pre-V2 Catholic history books as well.
 
Actually, it just means that the Protestant world-view happens to be the dominant one, and thus, the “default mode,” in our particular society.
 
if you are talking about my comment about protestant = secular…

the further away from Christ’s Church you go, the worse off you are, spiritually… (though you will probably be better off economically… [Portestant “work ethic”… etc…]??

Even when M Luther was still around, he decried the sorry state of affairs in the nation because of his pushing the belief that you can do whatever you want & still be in good with Jesus and get to Heaven… withoiut even any Purgatory to clean you up!!!

Why would such a belief system NOT cause problems…? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist… or even a pope to figure that one out…
 
Oh, Distracted, I’m sorry you’ve come to that conclusion.

Please try to concentrate on the gentle and charitable posts. I think you’ll find that the majority of posters at least try to be nice. Some of them are less tactful than others.

The rudesbys are in a minority, but they stand out by their very rudeness, which is jarring and therefore memorable. Pray for them and let them go. If they get bad enough they will be banned - Catholic or not!

Ruthie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top