How many Catholics think this way?

[Sepharad]

On another forum, a few posters made comments that I found genuinely disturbing: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=250069

I would like to know how many Catholics truly feel this way? And I’m sure other non-Catholics in addition to myself here would also like to know.

To those Catholics who feel their religion should have the right to suppress non-Catholic religions by law and enforce their religion by law, they need to know that this country…the USA…was founded as a safe haven from that very thing. In fact even Catholics came here, to Maryland, to have a place where they could worship God as they saw fit.

How many Catholics feel that in an “ideal” society, their church should have the authority to suppress non-Catholic religions and impose their beliefs onto others?

 

[ibkc]

I think that in an ideal world, everyone would want to belong to the Catholic (Universal) Church, and so it wouldn’t be a matter for debate.

I also understood that the world we live in is not ideal, and that people have different ideas about the truth, and that forcing a single religion on unbelievers does nothing for anyone.

In that way, I depart from the “traddies” even though I agree with them on a great many other things.

 

[Sepharad]

I think that in an ideal world, everyone would want to belong to the Catholic (Universal) Church, and so it wouldn’t be a matter for debate.

I also understood that the world we live in is not ideal, and that people have different ideas about the truth, and that forcing a single religion on unbelievers does nothing for anyone.

In that way, I depart from the “traddies” even though I agree with them on a great many other things.

The last (most infamous) time when Catholics tried to impose their religion onto others, it ended up being called by history “The Spanish Inquisition”. I’d think Catholics would not want to go that route again, considering that the church still has trouble living it down.

 

[Hisalone]

On another forum, a few posters made comments that I found genuinely disturbing: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=250069

I would like to know how many Catholics truly feel this way? And I’m sure other non-Catholics in addition to myself here would also like to know.

To those Catholics who feel their religion should have the right to suppress non-Catholic religions by law and enforce their religion by law, they need to know that this country…the USA…was founded as a safe haven from that very thing. In fact even Catholics came here, to Maryland, to have a place where they could worship God as they saw fit.

How many Catholics feel that in an “ideal” society, their church should have the authority to suppress non-Catholic religions and impose their beliefs onto others?

That is what muslims believe. Thank God the USA was founded on Protestant principles.

 

[Al_Masetti]

On another forum, a few posters made comments that I found genuinely disturbing: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=250069

I would like to know how many Catholics truly feel this way? ?

For the benefit of interested readers and posters, could you restate very specifically what you mean by “this way”.

I read some of that thread and couldn’t figure out exactly what you meant.

I’m sure it is clear to you, but I was unable to figure out what “this way” actually meant (to you).

Thanks.

 

[violetandgandal]

“To those Catholics who feel their religion should have the right to suppress non-Catholic religions by law and enforce their religion by law, they need to know that this country…the USA…was founded as a safe haven from that very thing. In fact even Catholics came here, to Maryland, to have a place where they could worship God as they saw fit.”

Maryland may have been founded as a Catholic colony, but it didn’t remain so for long. In 1649, only 15 years or so after being founded, it came under the control of the Puritans. After that, Catholics were excluded from participating in government and restrained in the exercise of their faith. In 1692, the Anglican church gained control of Maryland. Religious liberty was extended to all except Catholics. Catholic parents were forbidden to instruct their children in the faith under the threat of having their children taken away from them. They were not even allowed to send their children away to be instructed, though many did. Priests were forbidden from exercising their functions except in private home chapels. They tried to pass a bill to confiscate the property of clergy. All of this went on until the revolution. So, Catholics really didn’t have a place they were safe even in a place founded where they could have religious freedom.

 

[SacredHeartFan]

As mentioned above and ideal society everyone would want to belong to the Catholic Church therefore there would be no need to force it upon others.

We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds and the rest?

It is known to us and to you that those who are in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in His supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.

 

[Aydan]

The way I interpret it the person is asking how some Catholics would want to see all other religions done away with except for Catholicism and how many of us Catholics agree with that argument?
For me personally as a Catholic I do not agree with that argument I prefer to let Jesus make that kind of judgment about who is right and who is wrong for he is the just judge and I am not. I am just a mere mortal so I feel I do not have the right to make such a judgment.

For the benefit of interested readers and posters, could you restate very specifically what you mean by “this way”.

I read some of that thread and couldn’t figure out exactly what you meant.

I’m sure it is clear to you, but I was unable to figure out what “this way” actually meant (to you).

Thanks.

 

[1ke]

The last (most infamous) time when Catholics tried to impose their religion onto others, it ended up being called by history “The Spanish Inquisition”.

This is inaccurate. The Spanish Inquisition did no such thing.

I’d think Catholics would not want to go that route again, considering that the church still has trouble living it down.

The Church only has trouble “living down” people’s ignorance regarding the inquisitions.

 

[BlestOne]

This is inaccurate. The Spanish Inquisition did no such thing.

The Church only has trouble “living down” people’s ignorance regarding the inquisitions.

AMEN!!!

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

“To those Catholics who feel their religion should have the right to suppress non-Catholic religions by law and enforce their religion by law, they need to know that this country…the USA…was founded as a safe haven from that very thing. In fact even Catholics came here, to Maryland, to have a place where they could worship God as they saw fit.”

Maryland may have been founded as a Catholic colony, but it didn’t remain so for long. In 1649, only 15 years or so after being founded, it came under the control of the Puritans. After that, Catholics were excluded from participating in government and restrained in the exercise of their faith. In 1692, the Anglican church gained control of Maryland. Religious liberty was extended to all except Catholics. Catholic parents were forbidden to instruct their children in the faith under the threat of having their children taken away from them. They were not even allowed to send their children away to be instructed, though many did. Priests were forbidden from exercising their functions except in private home chapels. They tried to pass a bill to confiscate the property of clergy. All of this went on until the revolution. So, Catholics really didn’t have a place they were safe even in a place founded where they could have religious freedom.

And today we know that this behavior was not right. So, given that example, would you want to return the favor by having Catholicism the state religion in the U.S. and exclude the rights of protestants to practice their faith? I think that’s the point of the thread.

Peace…

MW

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

On another forum, a few posters made comments that I found genuinely disturbing: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=250069

I would like to know how many Catholics truly feel this way? And I’m sure other non-Catholics in addition to myself here would also like to know.

To those Catholics who feel their religion should have the right to suppress non-Catholic religions by law and enforce their religion by law, they need to know that this country…the USA…was founded as a safe haven from that very thing. In fact even Catholics came here, to Maryland, to have a place where they could worship God as they saw fit.

How many Catholics feel that in an “ideal” society, their church should have the authority to suppress non-Catholic religions and impose their beliefs onto others?

I have nothing against Catholicism and in fact I really admire it, but I don’t want to see any religion as a state religion here in the U.S. It wouldn’t work anyway. You’d always have those who go underground or openly rebel, causing civil strife. I hope that not too many Catholics believe Catholicism should be the state religion.

Peace…

MW

 

[Sepharad]

This is inaccurate. The Spanish Inquisition did no such thing.

The Church only has trouble “living down” people’s ignorance regarding the inquisitions.

Some of my mother’s family lived through it, so I think I know what took place.

Jews in Spain were told they had to become Catholics. They were told this by the monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella (yemach shemo/shemam)…some converted due to coercion, and simply kept being Jewish in secret.

When this was found out, these Jews (which your church now saw as “Catholics” even though they were converted by force) were then subject to the Spanish Inquisition.

I think it is disingenuous when Catholics say, “But The Spanish Inquisition did not go after Jews, only Catholics who had apostasized!”

By your definition, those anusim (Hebrew for “those who were forced to convert”) were “Catholics”. By our definition, they never stopped being Jews. Its all a matter of definition.

 

[b_justb]

For the benefit of interested readers and posters, could you restate very specifically what you mean by “this way”.

I read some of that thread and couldn’t figure out exactly what you meant.

I’m sure it is clear to you, but I was unable to figure out what “this way” actually meant (to you).

Thanks.

Bump for the OP. Please answer Al’s question for us. Thank you.

 

[bpbasilphx]

The last (most infamous) time when Catholics tried to impose their religion onto others, it ended up being called by history “The Spanish Inquisition”.

**One thing about the Spanis Inquisition: Jews who had always been known and Jews were left alone by order of Queen Isabella.

Did you know that?

I refer you to Thomas Walsh’s book “Characters of the Inquisition.”**

 

[1ke]

Jews in Spain were told they had to become Catholics.

This is not true.

Throughout the 15th century many Jews were converting-- those known as the conversos-- **of their own volition **for variety of reasons. Some perhaps religious but more for social and political gain.

It was not until the **END **of the 15th century, 1492, that Ferdinand issued the Alhambra Decree which gave them the choice to convert or leave the country due to the political unrest and anti-Jewish uprisings around the country. And, moreover, this was not a decree of the Church, but of the rulers of that country. And, it did not **force **anyone to convert.

While one may sit in the 21st century and argue about what kind of “choice” leaving the country was-- well, in the 15th century it was deemed by the monarchs as a way to deal with the civil unrest of the nation which had been battling for its very existence.

It was a choice they could have made instead of conversion.

When this was found out, these Jews (which your church now saw as “Catholics” even though they were converted by force) were then subject to the Spanish Inquisition.

Yes, a baptized person is a Catholic and as such is subject to the Catholic Church.

I think it is disingenuous when Catholics say, “But The Spanish Inquisition did not go after Jews, only Catholics who had apostasized!”

That is your opinion. I disagree.

There were Jews and Muslims who did NOT convert, and they were not subject to the Inquisition. Those who did convert-- conversos and moriscos-- were subject to the Church by virtue of their acceptance of baptism.

 

[RobHom]

Thank God the USA was founded on Protestant principles.

Sir, or Ma’am…That statement is so erroneous…its hysterical. You are foisting or believing what is known as “revisionist history”.

At “best” the United States was founded on Judeo-Christian Principles. Not “protestant”!

Might be that you need to spend some time studying US History and discover precisely who came to our shores first and exactly why they did. I’ll give you the lead in… They were fleeing from Protestants!! You can take it from there.

And on top of it all…you may wish to delve further into the facts that several of the “founding fathers” of this country and signers of the Constitution were “Deists”…

Please be accurate.

 

[Sepharad]

Bump for the OP. Please answer Al’s question for us. Thank you.

IOW do many Catholics in the USA feel that it would be proper and right to suppress non-Catholic religions in order to have everyone convert to Catholicism?

 

[Sepharad]

This is not true.

Throughout the 15th century many Jews were converting-- those known as the conversos-- **of their own volition **for variety of reasons. Some perhaps religious but more for social and political gain.

It was not until the **END **of the 15th century, 1492, that Ferdinand issued the Alhambra Decree which gave them the choice to convert or leave the country due to the political unrest and anti-Jewish uprisings around the country. And, moreover, this was not a decree of the Church, but of the rulers of that country. And, it did not **force **anyone to convert.

While one may sit in the 21st century and argue about what kind of “choice” leaving the country was-- well, in the 15th century it was deemed by the monarchs as a way to deal with the civil unrest of the nation which had been battling for its very existence.

It was a choice they could have made instead of conversion.

Yes, a baptized person is a Catholic and as such is subject to the Catholic Church.

That is your opinion. I disagree.

There were Jews and Muslims who did NOT convert, and they were not subject to the Inquisition. Those who did convert-- conversos and moriscos-- were subject to the Church by virtue of their acceptance of baptism.

If they converted “of their own volition”, then why did they keep practicing Judaism in secret, in fear that the authorities would find out and bring them before the Spanish Inquisition?

Some ‘choice’, to be baptized or be forced to leave the country! And, I might add, the ones who did have to leave were often required to leave all their wealth and possessions behind, and in some cases, their children (to be baptized and raised as Catholics.)

If you feel such mistreatment was acceptable, then I will remember that the next time Christians complain about similar mistreatment in Muslim countries.

 

[rpp]

The last (most infamous) time when Catholics tried to impose their religion onto others, it ended up being called by history “The Spanish Inquisition”. I’d think Catholics would not want to go that route again, considering that the church still has trouble living it down.

This is not true.

Throughout the 15th century many Jews were converting-- those known as the conversos-- **of their own volition **for variety of reasons. Some perhaps religious but more for social and political gain.

It was not until the **END **of the 15th century, 1492, that Ferdinand issued the Alhambra Decree which gave them the choice to convert or leave the country due to the political unrest and anti-Jewish uprisings around the country. And, moreover, this was not a decree of the Church, but of the rulers of that country. And, it did not **force **anyone to convert.

While one may sit in the 21st century and argue about what kind of “choice” leaving the country was-- well, in the 15th century it was deemed by the monarchs as a way to deal with the civil unrest of the nation which had been battling for its very existence.

It was a choice they could have made instead of conversion.

Yes, a baptized person is a Catholic and as such is subject to the Catholic Church.

That is your opinion. I disagree.

There were Jews and Muslims who did NOT convert, and they were not subject to the Inquisition. Those who did convert-- conversos and moriscos-- were subject to the Church by virtue of their acceptance of baptism.

1ke is correct.

If a person’s conversion was insincere, that is their problem and there were consequences, which were well known at the time, for doing this. If they did not want to face the consequences, they should not have prenteded to convert and lie when they submitted themselves for baptism, confirmation, Holy Communion and confession.

In addition, the assertion that Jews and muslims, by and large, converted by coercion is not supportable by historical evidence. That is not to say there were not isolated cases; I suspect there may have been. However, it has been an ongoing teaching of the Church, first put in writing by Augustiner in the 5th century, that all conversions must be sincere and come from the heart and that forced conversions is never permitted. So as soon as you say people were forced to convert, we know you are not quoting reliable historical sources.

Finally, do not confuse the actions of the Spanish Royal family with the actions of the Church. For example the Spanish Royals hijacked the Spanish Inquisition and Rome condemned them for it.