How many Catholics think this way?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sepharad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Have you ever read the “Homilies Against the Jews” by “St” John Chrysostom?
When reading a piece like this, a fair man seeking the truth will separate commentary against the practice of Judaism as a behavior and belief system (anti-Judaic), from those who were simply born into a Jewish family (anti-Semitic). In fact, it’s morally wrong to accuse someone of being anti-Semitic, when indeed they are talking about behavior and not simply about being born into a Jewish family. It’s a historical fact that many of those who practiced Judaism turned away and worshipped false gods, and got cauught up with their own power. Many who call themselves Christians do the same today, and are in trouble as well. The firstborn nation of God was unique and set apart, intended to be a light to the world, but they failed to do so. The first Son (and only Son) of God had to come to make things right. We all need Christ, without fail, and will not fail with Him. A deeper exploration of St. John Chrisystom and these other things are really for a different thread.
 
When reading a piece like this, a fair man seeking the truth will separate commentary against the practice of Judaism as a behavior and belief system (anti-Judaic), from those who were simply born into a Jewish family (anti-Semitic). In fact, it’s morally wrong to accuse someone of being anti-Semitic, when indeed they are talking about behavior and not simply about being born into a Jewish family. It’s a historical fact that many of those who practiced Judaism turned away and worshipped false gods, and got cauught up with their own power. Many who call themselves Christians do the same today, and are in trouble as well. The firstborn nation of God was unique and set apart, intended to be a light to the world, but they failed to do so. The first Son (and only Son) of God had to come to make things right. We all need Christ, without fail, and will not fail with Him. A deeper exploration of St. John Chrisystom and these other things are really for a different thread.
The Jewish people and our religion are inseparable. It is the Jewish Covenant (religion) which made us Jews. If a person hates the Jewish faith, that means they hate Jews also. The Jews are not a race but a religio-nation…this means we are a people that has their own religious covenant. This is why we say that a Jew who turns his back omn his religion and adopts another, ceases to be a Jew in the full sense of the word.

BTW I’m a female, not a male, and my handle is not “Shepherd” but “Sepharad”, which is the Hebrew term for the country of Spain…it is a term that denotes Jews of Sephardic (Spanish) ancestry.
 
Shepherd in my opinion you have missed the entire point of this post. The point of it was to say that any true Catholic could not be anti-Semitic. Of course there are some who claim to be Catholic who are anti-Semitic to be sure but the point is if they hold that view and refuse to come in line with the church then they are not really Catholic to begin with. Not only that the poster is describing his own personal experiences just because he has never experienced a Catholic who hates Jews does not mean that he’s not saying that there aren’t any “Catholics” who are anti-Semitic. Why are you so quick to to distrust everything people say? Why can’t you just except what they have to say at face value? For instance why are you so quick to say that the poster is incorrect when he is telling you about his own experiences? This is something that I cannot understand.:confused:
I have never met a Catholic who hated Jews or Judaism. I guess I am naive. I never even met any Jewish persons until I was an adult. And there are a lot of Catholics and Jewish people in St. Louis. My parents always said it was a good thing we had so many Jewish people in St. Louis, because so many actively support the fine arts, and my parents were patrons of the St. Louis Symphony.

Sepharad, you sure came up with a lot of anti-Jewish rhetoric. If it hadn’t been for your research informing us of the many anti-Jewish actions by members of my faith, I would never have known. This is because our Church doesn’t not teach them. Not sure if your sources are credible, expecially as to motive.

Perhaps someone here could do a Google search and find similar actions taken by Jewish people. Let’s start with the anathema in Jewish liturgy against Catholics.

members.aol.com/johnprh/curse.html

"It is on the suggestion of R. Gamaliel II, a little after
the fall of Jerusalem and very likely in the neighbourhood
of the year A.D.80, that was inserted in the “Shemoneh
Esreh” the famous formula against the Minim: “May the
apostate have not any hope and may the empire of pride be
uprooted promptly in our days.** May the Nazarenes and the
Minim perish in an instant, may they all be erased from the
book of life, that they may not be counted among the
righteous. Blessed be Thou, O God, who bringest down the
proud.” **61

** Nazarene being the perjorative term used by the Jews for Jewish Christians.

Interview in St.Ignatius Press of Roy Shoeman, Jewish convert to Catholicism"

"*IgnatiusInsight.com: As a convert from Judaism, what do you think are the major misconceptions that many Jews have about the Catholic Church? As a Catholic, what are the misconceptions that many Catholics have about Judaism and the Jewish people?

Roy H. Schoeman: Prior to my conversion, the central misconceptions I held about the Catholic Church was, of course, that it was in fundamental theological error, a misguided, naïve illegitimate offshoot of the true Judaism. I saw Catholics as misguided followers of a false Messiah engaging in a host of childish and **superstitious **practices.

I also had the mistaken belief that the Catholic Faith was “anti-Semitic” and denigrated Jews and Judaism. Nothing could be further from the truth. What greater honor could be accorded Judaism than to say that it is the religion of God Himself, and when God became Man, He became a Jew? What greater honor could be accorded to the Jewish race than to say that they alone, among all the peoples of the earth, are related by blood to the incarnate God? Or that it was from their race that came the only perfect human creature, the Blessed Virgin Mary? Even as the most fervent, enthusiastic Jew, I never could have ascribed a glory to Judaism comparable to that assigned it by the Catholic Faith."*

notes on the author

“* The author, Roy Schoeman, was born in a suburb of New York City of “Conservative” Jewish parents who had fled Nazi Germany. His Jewish education and formation was received under some of the most prominent Rabbis in contemporary American Jewry, including Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, probably the foremost Conservative Rabbi in the U.S. and his hometown Rabbi growing up; Rabbi Arthur Green, later the head of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College who was his religion teacher and mentor during high school and early college; and Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach, a prominent Hasidic Rabbi with whom he lived in Israel for several months. His secular education included a B.Sc. from M.I.T. and an M.B.A. magna cum laude from Harvard Business School.” *"

It seems the purpose of this thread is to promote anti-Catholic bigotry.
 
Truthfully, I would not accept as valid anything said about Judaism by a Jew who apostasized from Judaism. Would you accept as legitimate about Catholicism something said by a Catholic who apostasized from Catholicism?

In Judaism we have a long history (esp. from medieval times) of Jews who apostasized and then, to curry favor with their new Catholic masters, lied about their former people and did horrendous things which brought much suffering upon the Jews. To name a few: Paul of Burgos, Pablo Cristiani (yemach shemo). Just research them and learn how “noble” some Jewish apostates were in our history. This is why most historically knowledgeable Jews are very suspicious of Jews who convert out and then claim they “still love” the Jewish people.

(Incidentally, I have it on good authority—from a woman I have known for years, who converted from Judaism to Catholicism and whose story is in Schoeman’s new book–that he is a notorious “exaggerator”–her words, not mine.) I notice he also likes to name-drop…I have yet to contact the rabbis he claims to have known in his past, to find out if that is simply another “exaggeration” on his part. Rabbi Carlebach is deceased, so he’s off the hook with him).

Forgive me if I sound very suspicious of such converts–in Jewish history we have learned the hard way that we need to be.
 
It seems Sepharad’s bigotry is based on the Jewish equivalent to Boettner.
"*
Truth About The Spanish Inquisition
Here is a short portion taken from David Goldstein’s 1943 book, “LETTERS Hebrew-Catholic to Mr. Isaacs”. It is valuable not only because it clears up the many lies that have been formed over the years regarding the Spanish Inquisition and the Church, but also because the author himself is of Jewish extraction, having converted to Catholicism; in 1955 he was named a “Knight of St. Gregory” for his apologetic works by Pope Pius XII.
Code:
Let us spread the truth about the Spanish Inquisition so as to counteract the libelous things being spread about the Church to the public by means of school books and the Mass Media. 

    The truth of this observation is never more apparent than when considering the Jews and the Spanish Inquisition. **If the teachings of the Old Testament were dinned into the minds and hearts of Jews as continually as is this historic calamity, the rabbis would not have to bemoan the lack of interest in religion on the part of children of Jewish parentage as they did lately at their Atlantic City Conference. ****Jewish book after book, weekly and monthly publication after weekly and monthly publication, so incessantly harp upon the Spanish Inquisition that it has become a Jewish "persecution complex," as Maurice Fueurlich said in the "Forum" (Sept., 1937).** In writing on "Children of a Martyr Race," this writer says, that "**the Spanish Inquisition has been dinned into my consciousness so deeply that it became a basic element in my emotional life." **        The Jewish version of the Spanish Inquisition, which took place four hundred and fifty years ago, is the source from which has emanated much Jewish fear of the Catholic Church, {snip} This is true even among rabbis who seek a union of forces with Catholic priests against the injustices of our time that afflict the Jews. They hold that as long as Christianity is divided; as long as** Catholics are in the minority there is no fear. But should the Catholic Church ever become the only Christian Church, as she was during the middle ages, then beware of the Auto-da-Fe (Act of Faith),** a solemn religious ceremony that the uninformed and the misleaders hold to have been a place of torture and burning at the stake. 

    **Those in Jewry who speak or write about the Spanish Inquisition, with minor exceptions, have received their knowledge of it from prejudicial sources, or from persons whose data concerning it were taken from poisoned sources of information. **That accounts for your prodding me, as have many others, with the query:
“How can you join a church that inflicted the cruelties practiced upon your own people during the Spanish Inquisition?”
Your query could be dismissed with the simple declaration that my journey to the baptismal font of the Catholic Church was conditioned upon my belief in her principles, and not upon agreement with everything done by Catholics during the Spanish Inquisition, or any other intense historic period. But the import of your query, considering that the Spanish Inquisition is a bugbear that closes the Jewish mind to things Catholic, prompts me to deal with the subject at length, and without any equivocation.

the Inquisition was instituted in Spain for persons who professed to be Catholics and not for practicing Jews. It was to unearth, and to bring to penance, not merely heretics, as many Jews believe, but also bigamists, adulterers, blasphemers, and other violators of the principles of the Church to which they, as baptized men and women, were obligated to be true. George E. Sokolsky, publicist, of New York City, says in “We Jews,”
“The task of the Inquisition was not to Persecute Jews but to cleanse the Church of unorthodoxy. The Inquisition was not concerned with infidels outside the Church but with heretics within it” (N.Y., 1935, p. 53).
The Spanish Inquisition was instituted to weed out those baptized Jews and Moslems who pretended to be sincere Catholics, while they secretly adhered to the practices of Judaism and Mohammedanism, which is a most serious sacrilegious offense. They were also enemies of the State, which was Christian in principle and carried the Cross in battle against the Crescent. As further evidence, consider what Dr. Salo Wittmayer Baron, one of America’s foremost Jewish historians, has to say about this matter. I quote from “A Social and Religious History of the Jews” (N.Y., 1937, VOL 2 p. 58) -
"It appears to be a fact as well as a theory that Jews who never ceased professing Judaism were, on the whole, left undisturbed. - In the fourteen years of the activity of the Spanish Inquisition, from its establishment in 1478 to the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, we hear of only one persecution directed against a Jewish community, where the Jewry of Huesca was accused in 1489 of having admitted conversos (pseudo-converts from Judaism to Christianity) to the Jewish fold. It was precisely the inability of the inquisitorial courts to check Jewish influence on the conversos that served as a decisive argument for the Catholic monarchs in banishing Jews from Spain…
Spain was at war for more than a half dozen centuries against the Mohammedans with whom the Jews were lined up against the Spaniards. It was a battle of the Cross against the Crescent. This is vouched for by Graetz’s “History of the Jews,” the “Jewish Encyclopedia,” the “Encyclopedia of Jewish Knowledge,” “Vallentine’s Jewish Encyclopedia,” and other authorities of foremost standing in Jewry. The two last named say, ***
“The Spanish Jews welcomed, it is even said that they invited, the Arab invasion. Under the Caliphate (Mohammedan ruler) of the West, with its capital at Cordova, their members (the Jews) grew and they attained great influence in the State” (Dr. Cecil Roth, in Vallentine’s J.E., p. 612).
“It is admitted that the African Jews aided the Arabs in the capture of Cordova, Malaga, Granada, Seville, and Toledo and these cities were placed under Jewish control by the conquerors” (Ency. J. Knowledge, p. 531).***
as far as the abuses of the Inquisition are concerned, the Catholic Church is no more responsible for them than she is for the Spanish bull fights which she condemned. Those abuses were committed, with a few exceptions, by the civil power, and they were condemned by Popes Leo X, Paul III, Paul IV, and Sixtus IV who reigned during that period of history. That is very likely news to you, as it is to most Jews, who have been **“fed up” with stories of the Auto-da-Fe that are as far from being true as are the stories about Jews slaughtering Christian children to use their blood for ritual purposes. **

the popes were the protectors of the Jews, and not their enemies. Rome was a haven of refuge for the persecuted Jews when the Eternal City was ruled by the popes, to which many of the Jews driven out of Spain migrated. You need not take my word regarding the friendliness of the popes, as it is confirmed by Dr. Cecil Roth of London, Jewry’s leading present-day historian on the middle ages. He said a few years ago, while addressing the Zionist Forum in Buffalo, N.Y.
"Only in Rome has the colony of Jews continued its existence since before the beginning of the Christian era, because of all the dynasties of Europe, the Papacy not only refused to persecute the Jews of Rome and Italy, but throughout the ages popes were protectors of the Jews
.
"Some Jews have the feeling that the Papacy has a policy of persecuting Jews. But you must remember that English history is definitely anti-Catholic’ and your views of Catholicism may have been colored by English history. We Jews who have suffered so much from prejudices, should rid our minds of prejudices and learn the facts. The truth is that the popes and the Catholic Church from the earliest days of the Church were never responsible for physical persecution of Jews and only Rome, among the capitals of the world, is free from having been a place of Jewish tragedy. For this we Jews must have gratitude" (Feb. 25th, 1927). *

trosch.org/for/inquisition.html

Sems ironic that Jews collaborated with Muslims agains the Catholics.
 
If you are going to quote people like the late David Goldstein (who, in case you did not know, was one of the Jews who converted and then turned against his former people), and if you are going to quote him under the assumption that what he says about Judaism is true, does that mean I can quote Bart Brewer and assume that what he says about Catholicism is also true?

As you may or may not know, Brewer was a Catholic priest who converted to evangelical Christianity and started an organization called Mission to Catholics, to convert Catholics to his form of Christianity. And there are others like him.

Does it mean I can go ahead and accept what they say about Catholicism as legitimate?
 
Originally Posted by Sepharad
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.

I don’t know what religious persuasion you are, but, isn’t Chriust worth fighting for?
 
Originally Posted by Sepharad
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.

I don’t know what religious persuasion you are, but, isn’t Chriust worth fighting for?
I happen to be a religious Jew of partial Spanish extraction. And no, I do not in any way, shape or form feel Jesus is worth fighting for. But I think God most certainly is!
 
The Jewish people and our religion are inseparable. It is the Jewish Covenant (religion) which made us Jews. If a person hates the Jewish faith, that means they hate Jews also. The Jews are not a race but a religio-nation…this means we are a people that has their own religious covenant. This is why we say that a Jew who turns his back omn his religion and adopts another, ceases to be a Jew in the full sense of the word.

BTW I’m a female, not a male, and my handle is not “Shepherd” but “Sepharad”, which is the Hebrew term for the country of Spain…it is a term that denotes Jews of Sephardic (Spanish) ancestry.
We often use man to denote a member of mankind. I get tired of posting him/her all the time. Now that I know, I can address you more specifically.

Anti-Semitic means against a bloodline, the bloodline of Sem. This has nothing to do with beliefs or behaviors. I can easily be against the practice of Judaism now, without being against the person born to Jewish parents, or in the bloodline of Sem. It’s quite logical and healthy. To confuse the two is unjust and unhealthy. In fact, being anti-Judaic is very much in favor of the person, as they are missing out on the Messiah. What are my weapons? They are faith, hope and a burning charity. Prayer is such a powerful force, that we use this to the benefit of mankind.

If a Jew converts to Catholicism, do they cease to exist on the planet? No, of course not. It would be a very nice combination to have the bloodline of Abraham and the be in the New Covenant as well with the the Son of God as Head of the Church.

Covenants are with people, as opposed to being a contract. It is the covenants throughout history with faithful men that God made His firstborn people. You can say what you want, but being against the pracitce of Judaism is not antisemitic. It’s simply unfair to accuse someone of being antisemitic when they’re discussing behaviors and beliefs. Much of what the early Church Fathers wrote about was the practice of Judaizing. They were talking about behaviors an beliefs, not the bloodline. Behaviors and beliefs do not distinguish a bloodline.

There were many covenants throughout history, with Adam and Eve, with Noah, with Abraham, with Moses, with David, and then the greatest… There is a New and Everlasting Covenant that you need to find out about established by Jesus the Messiah. It’s by far the greatest, and we are God’s people. We are His family, and He’s invited you to be as well. Before the Messiah came, Judiasm was the best thing. However, by practicing Judaism after the Messiah has come, you are now practicing (a behavior) apostacy of the only Church started by Christ, Who is the Son of the living God. Jesus always was, so He was there throughought covenant history, as He is now with the New and Everlasting Covenant.
 
Sepharad
I am unfamiliar with Jewish history because I’m unfamiliar with the religion so forgive me for getting your handle wrongI speak Turkish not Hebrew. People get my name wrong all the time of my first and last name and I don’t attack them or it especially on here where they cannot tell who I am because they’re not looking at me. The so-called male reference I’ve learned in school that if you are not sure what sex someone is male or female you use he and I was referring to the poster. Like another poster told me on another thread what I’ve wouldn’t consider any other opinions different from mine if it doesn’t sound good to your ear than you simply won’t hear it. That is definitely what is going on in this case in my opinion.
BTW I’m a female, not a male, and my handle is not “Shepherd” but “Sepharad”, which is the Hebrew term for the country of Spain…it is a term that denotes Jews of Sephardic (Spanish) ancestry.
 
Sepharad
I am unfamiliar with Jewish history because I’m unfamiliar with the religion so forgive me for getting your handle wrongI speak Turkish not Hebrew. People get my name wrong all the time of my first and last name and I don’t attack them or it especially on here where they cannot tell who I am because they’re not looking at me. The so-called male reference I’ve learned in school that if you are not sure what sex someone is male or female you use he and I was referring to the poster. Like another poster told me on another thread what I’ve wouldn’t consider any other opinions different from mine if it doesn’t sound good to your ear than you simply won’t hear it. That is definitely what is going on in this case in my opinion.
BTW I’m a female, not a male, and my handle is not “Shepherd” but “Sepharad”, which is the Hebrew term for the country of Spain…it is a term that denotes Jews of Sephardic (Spanish) ancestry.
I know; its called the “masculine universal” in English grammar, but I’ve been on this forum long enough that the regulars by now know I’m female (in the beginning everyone referred to me as male though!) BTW your name is very familiar to me because I have a close friend from Turkey who is named Aydin! He belongs to my synagogue (he was raised Muslim in Turkey, with a Turkish Muslim father and Greek Jewish mother), but has returned to Judaism (in Jewish Law a person is a Jew if their mother is.)
 
We often use man to denote a member of mankind. I get tired of posting him/her all the time. Now that I know, I can address you more specifically.

MDK I think that comment was meant for me because I accidentally misspelled her name at two o’clock in the morning and I did it long before you did…
 
Okay, so is this specifically a thread wondering how many people want America to be a theocracy in Catholicism?

I doubt a lot of people would seriously argue for that. Instead, I wonder if this is actually about the more commonly confused idea of legislating and legalising certain behaviors that are also mentioned in religion.

For example, a red hot one is abortion. Over and over again, I hear the inane comment that America is all about choice, therefore abortion should be legal, and anyone who disagrees is just trying to make America a theocracy, because most major religions condemn abortion.

🤷
 
okay but most people are not familiar with my name and most people are surprised when they find out that I am actually female. I’m just saying remember that people cannot see you on here so they do not know I didn’t because I haven’t seen that many posts from you.
40.png
Sepharad:
I know; its called the “masculine universal” in English grammar, but I’ve been on this forum long enough that the regulars by now know I’m female (in the beginning everyone referred to me as male though!) BTW your name is very familiar to me because I have a close friend from Turkey who is named Aydin! He belongs to my synagogue (he was raised Muslim in Turkey, with a Turkish Muslim father and Greek Jewish mother), but has returned to Judaism (in Jewish Law a person is a Jew if their mother is.)
 
okay but most people are not familiar with my name and most people are surprised when they find out that I am actually female. I’m just saying remember that people cannot see you on here so they do not know I didn’t because I haven’t seen that many posts from you.

I know; its called the “masculine universal” in English grammar, but I’ve been on this forum long enough that the regulars by now know I’m female (in the beginning everyone referred to me as male though!) BTW your name is very familiar to me because I have a close friend from Turkey who is named Aydin! He belongs to my synagogue (he was raised Muslim in Turkey, with a Turkish Muslim father and Greek Jewish mother), but has returned to Judaism (in Jewish Law a person is a Jew if their mother is.)
So, you are female even though your name is Aydan? Is Aydan the feminine form and Aydin the masculine form?
 
Okay, so is this specifically a thread wondering how many people want America to be a theocracy in Catholicism?

I doubt a lot of people would seriously argue for that. Instead, I wonder if this is actually about the more commonly confused idea of legislating and legalising certain behaviors that are also mentioned in religion.

For example, a red hot one is abortion. Over and over again, I hear the inane comment that America is all about choice, therefore abortion should be legal, and anyone who disagrees is just trying to make America a theocracy, because most major religions condemn abortion.

🤷
I never quite understood the charge that making abortion illegal would somehow make Catholicism the national religion in the USA (or something similar to that claim!)

Catholicism is not the only religion that opposes abortion; Orthodox Judaism also opposes abortion-on-demand. Most fundamentalist Protestants also oppose abortion-on-demand. Islam opposes abortion-on-demand. I know atheists, agnostics and even one Wiccan in the pro-life mvmt who are against abortion too!

But I think its because Catholicism is the most visible religion opposing abortion, that many ppl wrongly assume that ONLY they are against it.

Before 1973 (and before 1970 in NY) abortion-on-demand was illegal EVERYWHERE in the USA. The only kind you could legally get was a “therapeutic” abortion, which meant one to save the life or mental wellbeing of the mother. (I am old enough to remember the tail end of those times, when women had to get a psychiatrist to attest that she would commit suicide if she did notn get an abortion.) I remember in elementary school (6th grade) overhearing in the girls restroom at school, two girls discussing the fact that the older sister of one of them “had to go to New York”, which we all knew was a code for getting an abortion.)

Was the CC in charge of this country back then? I don’t think so, yet ppl claim today that if abortion were outlawed, it would mean inserting the Catholic religion into law.
 
I never quite understood the charge that making abortion illegal would somehow make Catholicism the national religion in the USA (or something similar to that claim!)

Catholicism is not the only religion that opposes abortion; Orthodox Judaism also opposes abortion-on-demand. Most fundamentalist Protestants also oppose abortion-on-demand. Islam opposes abortion-on-demand. I know atheists, agnostics and even one Wiccan in the pro-life mvmt who are against abortion too!

But I think its because Catholicism is the most visible religion opposing abortion, that many ppl wrongly assume that ONLY they are against it.

Before 1973 (and before 1970 in NY) abortion-on-demand was illegal EVERYWHERE in the USA. The only kind you could legally get was a “therapeutic” abortion, which meant one to save the life or mental wellbeing of the mother. (I am old enough to remember the tail end of those times, when women had to get a psychiatrist to attest that she would commit suicide if she did notn get an abortion.) I remember in elementary school (6th grade) overhearing in the girls restroom at school, two girls discussing the fact that the older sister of one of them “had to go to New York”, which we all knew was a code for getting an abortion.)

Was the CC in charge of this country back then? I don’t think so, yet ppl claim today that if abortion were outlawed, it would mean inserting the Catholic religion into law.
Well, yeah, I’m not saying they have an argument to stand on. I was just wondering if the deeper issue is about people thinking legislating morality is thus legislating a particular religion.

I guess this will be an ongoing debate, though, as most legislated behavior in America is also a moral issue. (E.g. murder, sex abuse, theft.)
 
If you are going to quote people like the late David Goldstein (who, in case you did not know, was one of the Jews who converted and then turned against his former people), and if you are going to quote him under the assumption that what he says about Judaism is true, does that mean I can quote Bart Brewer and assume that what he says about Catholicism is also true?

As you may or may not know, Brewer was a Catholic priest who converted to evangelical Christianity and started an organization called Mission to Catholics, to convert Catholics to his form of Christianity. And there are others like him.

Does it mean I can go ahead and accept what they say about Catholicism as legitimate?
Depends on how credible he is. History is history. If Brewer (yes I do who he is) is credible, fine. Is Brewer relevant to this topic of this thread? Just because somebody converts does not make them a liar. I personally avoid immersing myself in anti-Catholic bigotry because I don’t like to contaminate my brain with filth. I quoted David Goldstein because of his credentials. The fact that he converted to Catholicism has nothing to do with his facts.

Why don’t you address the facts presented here instead of making disingenuous attacks on the Catholic Church? Most of your posts resort to your personal experiences. Instead of talking about yourself, why don’t you address the facts?
 
actually to be technical in Turkish its unisex although it is most often used for males rather than females but it is not a comon name in Turkey. I chose my Turkish name for its Gaelic meaing rather than its feminine and/or masculine characteristics. actully when I chose it its femininity or masculinity never even crossed my mind I took it because of its Gaelic meaning and because I like it. This is the feminine form of the name I believe. But it has several different spellings. And as I’ve said it really wasn’t a consideration when I chose it.
40.png
Sepharad:
So, you are female even though your name is Aydan? Is Aydan the feminine form and Aydin the masculine form?
 
Depends on how credible he is. History is history. If Brewer (yes I do who he is) is credible, fine. Is Brewer relevant to this topic of this thread? Just because somebody converts does not make them a liar. I personally avoid immersing myself in anti-Catholic bigotry because I don’t like to contaminate my brain with filth. I quoted David Goldstein because of his credentials. The fact that he converted to Catholicism has nothing to do with his facts.

Why don’t you address the facts presented here instead of making disingenuous attacks on the Catholic Church? Most of your posts resort to your personal experiences. Instead of talking about yourself, why don’t you address the facts?
You said you quoted Goldstein because of “his credentials”. What credentials would those be? These?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Goldstein_%28Catholic_apologist%29

And why might it be that when I did a search for anything written by him, the only websites that turned up anything (apart from Wikipedia) were Traditionalist Catholic sites? I am well aware that, apart from their very admirable defense of the Tridentine Latin Mass, many Traditionalists tend to dislike Jews.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top