I still just don't get it

  • Thread starter Thread starter mozart-250
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is what i was responding to:
Originally Posted by Mannyfit75
A true Christian would say that Church and Christ are not separated. However, I have heard from Evangelical Christians (not Lutherans) that you don’t need the Church and all you need is Jesus. How do you explain that?
They are wandering in a “theological miasma” of their own design. Its called “BK theology”…as in “Burger King, have it your way”.
If such a thing is true then there are some very serious theological problems with it in light of the history of the church. This would mean that all that the church does is exactly what Christ does. Including evil.
As it is not true, it is not an issue. See my prior post for examples… Evil deeds are those of men, not Christ.
 
You seem like a nice guy, but not ready to seriously move ahead yet. I hope you get to that point where serious dialogue regarding the truth is willfully received. At that point, you may begin to move ahead, instead of deflecting the truth in favor of confusion.
Well Scripture tells me to examine everything carefully, hold fast to that which is good.

The responsibility here is mine. I am not just going to take anybody’s word for anything just because they say so.

If you don’t like that, too bad. I have a responsibility towards God not to swallow every wind of doctrine floating here and there around the church but to test it. I know you consider it all “private interpretation” but I am accountable to God for what I believe, and I am accountable to God to make sure in my own heart and mind that what I am hearing is indeed the truth. That’s just the way it is.

And I started a very long post detailing the steps that I have taken to test what you are saying, but I since decided not to bother with it. Suffice it to say, every question / issue that I raised here has not spur of the moment, but stuff that I have come up with in my very own process of listening very carefully to what you have to say, examining it from a number of perspectives, and then testing it.

Suffice it to say that Catholicism has not yet passed the test.

If you think that the stuff that I am throwing out here is me “throwing up roadblocks” that is your prerogative, but I am not going to apologize for it. I am not going to accept anything as being truth just on somebody’s say so, much less anonymous folks over the internet.
 
Originally Posted by justasking4
Has the church ever done evil?

RobHom
The quickest and simple answer is NO. But before you have a kneejerk reaction to that…read on. Catholics will freely admit that there have been some rather “colorful and not so honest persons” who abused their power and position…and some have even committed crimes. But those are persons…humans. Not the “Church”.

To illustrate my point: Jim Bakker was a thief, liar, adulterer and embezzler…who went to prison for his crimes. Now, did the Assemblies of God commit the crimes or did Jim Bakker.

To further illustrate my point: Jimmy Swaggart was caught with a prostitute in a motel…at the time when he was the “leading television evangelist”… Now did the Assemblies of God commit this crime or did Jimmy Swaggart.

I could go on and on… but I won’t. Attempting to hang wrongdoing on a “Church” either by inference or false claim is just wrong.

Its also a bad door to open.

By the way, I have no particular issues with the Assemblies of God… I have friends who are, and they are good people. So if anyone took offense or thought I was aiming at them…I was not. Bakker and Swaggart’s names just happened to come to mind.
What about other things done centuries ago that are far more problematic? This is why saying the church and Christ are not separate leads to some very bad theology.
 
They are wandering in a “theological miasma” of their own design. Its called “BK theology”…as in “Burger King, have it your way”.

As it is not true, it is not an issue. See my prior post for examples… Evil deeds are those of men, not Christ.
Sadly it is true. Much evil has been done in the name of Christ by those who were officals of the church.
 
What about other things done centuries ago that are far more problematic? This is why saying the church and Christ are not separate leads to some very bad theology.
If you are referring to things done in Medieval times… I will only suggest that you study “secular histories” of those things, and consider actually what was done. There is no “bad theology”, at least not where the Church and Christ are concerned.
 
Sadly it is true. Much evil has been done in the name of Christ by those who were officals of the church.
Lets really be fair about this… It, the evils, perpetrated by mankind in the name of God, is not limited to any one specific religion, denomination, creed or nationality. Its a human issue.
 
Suffice it to say that Catholicism has not yet passed the test.

If you think that the stuff that I am throwing out here is me “throwing up roadblocks” that is your prerogative, but I am not going to apologize for it. I am not going to accept anything as being truth just on somebody’s say so, much less anonymous folks over the internet.
Arrogant to say it hasn’t passed the test, when it was built by Christ.

Not seeking an apology and wouldn’t expect one from you. One has to be humble in order to apologize. It is my prerogative to tell the truth, and so I exercise it as such. I thought at first you were seeking decent dialogue and wanted a discussion of the facts and truth. It had that outward appearance. However, you aren’t on that path yet. I hope you will be there in the future. There is evidence when one is honestly seeking to explore something and when one rejects it out of hand from preconceived ideas.

Odd attitude for someone on a public chat board, and like I said, there’s evidence when someone seeks to follow what is said to see if it’s accurate, rather than repeatedly objecting out of hand.

I don’t think you would be satisfied if Christ appeared to you in person. Why would you believe someone who tells the truth about his word. Whether you believe what I said now, in 10 days, 10 months, 10 years, or never… it’s still the truth. The truth will be there waiting for you when you’re ready to accept it.
 
Arrogant to say it hasn’t passed the test, when it was built by Christ.

Not seeking an apology and wouldn’t expect one from you. One has to be humble in order to apologize. It is my prerogative to tell the truth, and so I exercise it as such. I thought at first you were seeking decent dialogue and wanted a discussion of the facts and truth. It had that outward appearance. However, you aren’t on that path yet. I hope you will be there in the future. There is evidence when one is honestly seeking to explore something and when one rejects it out of hand from preconceived ideas.

Odd attitude for someone on a public chat board, and like I said, there’s evidence when someone seeks to follow what is said to see if it’s accurate, rather than repeatedly objecting out of hand.

I don’t think you would be satisfied if Christ appeared to you in person. Why would you believe someone who tells the truth about his word. Whether you believe what I said now, in 10 days, 10 months, 10 years, or never… it’s still the truth. The truth will be there waiting for you when you’re ready to accept it.
I hereby resign.

This approach is:

(1) My faith is superior to yours
(2) You do not believe me when I say this to you
(3) Therefore there is something wrong with you

I don’t think Catholics particularly like it when they are approached that way by Protestants. At least everything I have read on this forum suggests it.

However, reversing roles is perfectly acceptible I guess.

Anyway I am done.
 
I hereby resign.

This approach is:

(1) My faith is superior to yours
(2) You do not believe me when I say this to you
(3) Therefore there is something wrong with you

I don’t think Catholics particularly like it when they are approached that way by Protestants. At least everything I have read on this forum suggests it.

However, reversing roles is perfectly acceptible I guess.

Anyway I am done…
Good luck, and hope you come around. I think you’re actually a nice guy. I know you won’t now, but hope you will look back on my words someday and thank me, and others who did share the truth with you. We share the truth, no matter what denigrations, doubts, misperceptions, and/or reluctance to give the truth a chance that others bring to the table.

From what you said above, you still don’t understand.

The approach is more like:
  • Christ built His Church and wants us all to be in it.
  • I’m telling you about it. (This is love and charity from fellow man)
  • If you personally gave the truth of what Christ did and established an honest chance, you would see.
  • If you continue to object out of hand, no matter what another says, then how will you ever see?
The truth is the truth. Protestants by definition protest the truth… not all of it… but they do protest truth.

<<< Sand shaken from sandals>>>
 
Lets really be fair about this… It, the evils, perpetrated by mankind in the name of God, is not limited to any one specific religion, denomination, creed or nationality. Its a human issue.
And those who did so who were members of the Catholic Church knew they were acting contrary to the teachings of the Church, at the time. They were most emphatically not acting as agents of Christ, when they committed those sins. The Church is not to blame, for what they did.

I used to know someone who owned a Mac’s Milk store, years and years ago. Mac’s Milk is a very simple company that only has a few rules - buy stuff from suppliers, sell stuff to customers, and try not to get robbed, either from the till, or by shoplifters.

A couple of the employees went to the liquor store next door and robbed it, while they were on shift one night.

Strikingly, I noticed that (in complete contrast to what happens when people who commit sins while working for the Catholic Church are caught) nobody, not even the victims, ever thought of blaming Mac’s Milk, or of suing my friend as owner of the store, after they discovered who it was that had robbed the liquor store.

Instead, the individuals responsible for the crime were taken away to lock-up, given a trial (which my friend attended, as a witness) and then sentenced and put away for some number of years, in punishment for what they had done.

My friend testified that those boys had been working for him, and that they had been on shift on the night of the robbery. Since he hadn’t witnessed the actual crime, he didn’t say anything about that - and, wowsers, nobody ever accused him of “covering up” for the criminals. (Which is what would have happened, if it had been the Catholic Church instead of Mac’s Milk.)

They accepted the idea that he actually had no way of knowing that they were going to do that, and wasn’t there watching them or approving of them when they did it.

I really don’t know why people can’t accept the same principles, when it comes to the Catholic Church. 🤷
 
Mozart, what you’re looking for is evidence. Your ruler for the authenticity of that evidence is The Bible.

You are already Christian, so you have confined your search to Christianity. That being the case, you can whittle ALL the Protestant denominations that commenced from Luther away, since he only arrived at his theology in the 16th Century, and proved to be heretical by ‘the judges’ that stuck to the continuing lineage!

That leaves Catholicism. Since the Catholic Church canonized Scriptures, your ruler may be a little biased

Anyway, The Church canonized Scriptures so The Word can be made available and ‘carried’ to the four corners of the globe. Now, ‘you’ and others, use The Book, to judge Its Carrier! Fallible men have no way of knowing what was to come with The Word being so available to …uhm…other fallible men. Yet, somehow, they decreed and dogmatized doctrines which have now proved sooo applicable in our day of contrary and contesting viewpoints, that its almost UNCANNY! Guided by The Holy Spirit? You betcha!

“There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church” remains true to forever! Every soul that has ever heard of Christ, did so because of The Catholic Church. You, included! The Church has completed that part of Her deposit! What you believe ABOUT Christ, from your vantage, is part of your “working” out your salvation! We all have to.

Invincible Ignorance still applies to you because it also applies to us, Catholics! Just because one becomes Catholic doesn’t mean ‘you’ get plugged into a “Matrix chair” and have everything The Church ‘knows’ downloaded into ya head! We also do not get automatic salvation, just by BEING Catholic. That’s why we attend Mass regularly!

Predominantly, Invincible Ignorance has been taken to mean applicable to non-Christians, and those who, for whatever reason, have not heard of Christ! (A lost tribe; mentally ill; babies; insulated existence etc) But many Catholic DO NOT KNOW many things about Catholicism. But they know it is The True Church because it is the only one that can be proved was esrablished by Christ; by Scriptures and Her Tradition.

If you’re trying to connect all the dots to see if Catholicism is the one that WILL SAVE YOU, you will fail! The evidence will lead you to Catholicism, but ‘something’ else will come up and more evidence is required…and then you will wait for something else…and so on!

**Only, through The Grace of God, can you have the faith, that ULTIMATELY sets you ‘free.’ **

An ‘instrument’ has no will of its own!! That is THE GOAL of ALL Catholics! (Not my will, Father, But YOURS, be done) That is what we strive for!

:cool:
 
Mozart, what you’re looking for is evidence. Your ruler for the authenticity of that evidence is The Bible.

You are already Christian, so you have confined your search to Christianity. That being the case, you can whittle ALL the Protestant denominations that commenced from Luther away, since he only arrived at his theology in the 16th Century, and proved to be heretical by ‘the judges’ that stuck to the continuing lineage!

That leaves Catholicism. Since the Catholic Church canonized Scriptures, your ruler may be a little biased

Anyway, The Church canonized Scriptures so The Word can be made available and ‘carried’ to the four corners of the globe. Now, ‘you’ and others, use The Book, to judge Its Carrier! Fallible men have no way of knowing what was to come with The Word being so available to …uhm…other fallible men. Yet, somehow, they decreed and dogmatized doctrines which have now proved sooo applicable in our day of contrary and contesting viewpoints, that its almost UNCANNY! Guided by The Holy Spirit? You betcha!

“There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church” remains true to forever! Every soul that has ever heard of Christ, did so because of The Catholic Church. You, included! The Church has completed that part of Her deposit! What you believe ABOUT Christ, from your vantage, is part of your “working” out your salvation! We all have to.

Invincible Ignorance still applies to you because it also applies to us, Catholics! Just because one becomes Catholic doesn’t mean ‘you’ get plugged into a “Matrix chair” and have everything The Church ‘knows’ downloaded into ya head! We also do not get automatic salvation, just by BEING Catholic. That’s why we attend Mass regularly!

Predominantly, Invincible Ignorance has been taken to mean applicable to non-Christians, and those who, for whatever reason, have not heard of Christ! (A lost tribe; mentally ill; babies; insulated existence etc) But many Catholic DO NOT KNOW many things about Catholicism. But they know it is The True Church because it is the only one that can be proved was esrablished by Christ; by Scriptures and Her Tradition.

If you’re trying to connect all the dots to see if Catholicism is the one that WILL SAVE YOU, you will fail! The evidence will lead you to Catholicism, but ‘something’ else will come up and more evidence is required…and then you will wait for something else…and so on!

**Only, through The Grace of God, can you have the faith, that ULTIMATELY sets you ‘free.’ **

An ‘instrument’ has no will of its own!! That is THE GOAL of ALL Catholics! (Not my will, Father, But YOURS, be done) That is what we strive for!

:cool:
Very good. I will say though, that I’ve seen many Catholics on this board who do understand Catholicism, but will work first with basics on the foundational things, typically with those outside the Church who deny or doubt, in preparation for possibly larger things each may want to discuss. Many times, what causes disconnects between those attempting to discuss the weightier issues, is that they have different criteria and the foundation for understanding them is not established. Get some common ground first, or at least understanding. Often, if one can establish a good foundation, then the person is off and running, and the question of councils, Magisterium, Papal Infallibility, Sacraments, no women in the priesthood, etc come easier. Also, misconceptions and false beliefs, like sola scripture and/or sola fide, can get in the way of further discussion of larger issues. The Catholic cannot accept these falsehoods, but needs to promote understanding or somehow neutralize the effect of this in the conversation, in order to get to the truth in the full picture. Some of the fruits of the Catholic Church are not easily understood, especially for one who does not have foundation. One sees an orange, and knows it’s an orange tree. On the other hand, one sees Lumen Gentium, Dei Verbum, or some other document or teaching from Vatican II, and without understanding the basic nature and delegated authority in the Church, how can one really understand this work? If one were to read the The International Theological Commission’s work “Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized,” one may not get a good picture, and can be turned off by this instead of enlightened. One may ask, where does the Church get it’s authority, why does it say what it says, are they usurping Christ’s role? Instead of realizing these men are fulfilling their apostolic duty and authority given by Christ, one may instead conclude that they are usurping Christ’s role. Without laying some kind of foundation or some amount of common understanding, people are often just shouting across a chasm.

While the Catholic may be able to describe the difference between doctrine, dogma, customs (like priests being unmarried in Latin Rite Church), material sufficiency, formal sufficiency, Councils, Papal infallibility, Magisterium, the Sacraments, etc…, focusing on the correct conversation for the audience is also an art. If the horse doesn’t even taste the water brought to it, sadly, what can one do as we must respect their freedom of will, even though maybe not a particular use of that freedom.

Actually, The International Theological Commission’s work “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized,” gives further insight into the OP for this thread. Link to the full article is provided in the preceding sentence, and a particularly relevant section is shown below. I can’t say it any better than the commission has.

" Jesus taught: “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (Jn 3:5); from which we understand the need for sacramental Baptism.[133] Likewise, he said: “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” (Jn 6:53); from which we understand the (closely related) need for participation in the Eucharist. However, just as we do not conclude from the latter words that someone who has not received the sacrament of the Eucharist cannot be saved, so we should not deduce from the former words that someone who has not received the sacrament of Baptism cannot be saved. **What we should conclude is that no-one is saved without some relation to Baptism and Eucharist, and therefore to the Church which is defined by these sacraments. All salvation has some relation to Baptism, Eucharist and the Church. The principle that there is “no salvation outside the Church” means that there is no salvation which is not from Christ and ecclesial by its very nature. **Likewise, the scriptural teaching that “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” (Heb 11:6) indicates the intrinsic role of the Church, the communion of faith, in the work of salvation. It is especially in the liturgy of the Church that this role becomes manifest, as the Church prays and intercedes for all, including unbaptised infants who die."
 
Thank you for ‘enlarging’ on my miniscule proposal, MDK. I was attempting to stay within the boundaries of Mozart’s vantage. Unfortunately, he does not realise how limited his understanding of Catholicism is.

Because he has learned much here on this forum, he may have thought he possessed sufficient understanding to critique The Church and Her profession.

Myself included, there are many Catholics who are ignorant of the details of Catholic life. But the security is in the knowledge that Catholicism is ‘where Truth Lives!’ If I live to be a hundred, as a cradle Catholic, I still will not know everything about The Church.

The BEAUTY of it is, I DON’T HAVE TO! (Part of the reason Catholics are often accused of being mindless drones)

**Her “NO” is my ‘No’; Her “YES” is my ‘Yes.’ **

:cool:
 
Thank you for ‘enlarging’ on my miniscule proposal, MDK. I was attempting to stay within the boundaries of Mozart’s vantage. Unfortunately, he does not realise how limited his understanding of Catholicism is.

Because he has learned much here on this forum, he may have thought he possessed sufficient understanding to critique The Church and Her profession.

Myself included, there are many Catholics who are ignorant of the details of Catholic life. But the security is in the knowledge that Catholicism is ‘where Truth Lives!’ If I live to be a hundred, as a cradle Catholic, I still will not know everything about The Church.

The BEAUTY of it is, I DON’T HAVE TO! (Part of the reason Catholics are often accused of being mindless drones)

**Her “NO” is my ‘No’; Her “YES” is my ‘Yes.’ **

:cool:
I didn’t look upon your proposal as minimal. I agree that he probably doesn’t know how limited and errant is his idea of Catholicism.

I appreciate that you seek to follow the Catholic teachings without objection. A truly humble heart will do well. Being a Catholic or Catholic Apologetic, it is much easier in the sense that we don’t have to make things up, or stretch one aspect to attempt to cover the whole of one’s belief system. It’s amazing to me to hear how people can’t see Catholicism or it’s too hard. It’s all laid out, in beautiful fashion. It’s exceedingly easy if one is humble. That’s the rub… it’s difficult for some or perhaps many to be humble. This is how God hides His Kingdom in plain sight from those who are arrogant, and suppose themselves to be too smart to “fall” for the humble way in which Jesus set things up! Too smart to submit to the authority given by Christ the King to His “Prime Minister,” who acts with Christ’s delegated authority and who has the appropriate protection of the Holy Spirit. They say “Jesus would have never done this or that” or “I’m going straight to Christ” rather than to do it the way Christ established for us that leads us to bonding with Him and the appropriate relationship and friendship with Christ. They really don’t know what He did. To the humble, His Kingdom is all there in front of us in beautiful splendor!

None of us will know everything. ** What we have to “know” is humility and to be a good sheep in the flock that is being led to Christ by the shepherd put in place by Christ, and who is protected and kept from error in faith and morals by the Holy Spirit. **

In John Ch 21, we see that after catching nothing, the disciples then followed Christ’s orders and caught a multitude of fishes. In verse 11, “Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land, full of great fishes, one hundred and fifty-three. And although there were so many, the net was not broken.”

As a fisher of men, Peter brings the people of the world into the Kingdom of God. The net is symbolic of the Church, which the author specifically notes is not torn… the Church is intact and strong. By himself, we have seen that he is not capable of this, and makes missteps. Obviously, Peter can do any of this only with the help of God.
 
Has the church ever done evil?
No. The Church is incorruptible because Christ purified her, and keeps her pure by the power of HIs might.

Fallen men, who are joined to the Church, have done evil.

The fact that you would ask such a question indicates that you have little or no understanding of even the most basic teachings of Christianity. That is why I say you need to focus on the elementary things before you move on to more complex matters.
What about other things done centuries ago that are far more problematic? This is why saying the church and Christ are not separate leads to some very bad theology.
It is only a problem for a person with a flawed understanding of what the Church is. The Church is the Body of Christ, and Jesus is her Head, and her soul is the HS. It is these divine elements that prevent error. She also includes the saints who have go on to their heavenly reward, they are perfected, and also incapable of error.
 
Sadly it is true. Much evil has been done in the name of Christ by those who were officals of the church.
Yes, this is true, and it is very sad. But to lay these sins at the feet of Christ is wrong. Human beings are responsible for their own misbehavior, not God.
 
guanophore;4029426]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Has the church ever done evil?
No. The Church is incorruptible because Christ purified her, and keeps her pure by the power of HIs might.
Are you saying the various evil deeds that the Catholic church has done in the name of Christ was not evil?
Fallen men, who are joined to the Church, have done evil.
Since all men are fallen including Catholics, have they not also done evil at times?
The fact that you would ask such a question indicates that you have little or no understanding of even the most basic teachings of Christianity. That is why I say you need to focus on the elementary things before you move on to more complex matters.
That’s why i’m so grateful for you. I thought the matters we were discussing were elementary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
What about other things done centuries ago that are far more problematic? This is why saying the church and Christ are not separate leads to some very bad theology.
guanophore
It is only a problem for a person with a flawed understanding of what the Church is. The Church is the Body of Christ, and Jesus is her Head, and her soul is the HS. It is these divine elements that prevent error. She also includes the saints who have go on to their heavenly reward, they are perfected, and also incapable of error.
Do you believe then that those who are of the Body of Christ have never erred? Have any of your pastors ever erred? Have you?
 
Do you believe then that those who are of the Body of Christ have never erred? Have any of your pastors ever erred? Have you?
Members of the Catholic Church can err and sin, including pastors. The Church itself (its teachings, its morals, its essence) cannot. The Church is that which we join to, when we make a Profession of Faith or receive the Sacraments. It’s not a group of people - it’s an idea. It’s a perfect idea.
 
Are you saying the various evil deeds that the Catholic church has done in the name of Christ was not evil?
Evil is done by men. The Church does not promote or condone evil.

Perhaps you could illuminate us on these evil deeds?
Since all men are fallen including Catholics, have they not also done evil at times?
I think it goes without saying that Catholics are well aware of some of our more “colorful” people and chapters in history, and we readily admit that some were wrong.
Do you believe then that those who are of the Body of Christ have never erred? Have any of your pastors ever erred? Have you?
Men will err, as to err is human. Perfection belongs only to God.
Can I say that my Pastor has erred? No, I cannot, because I have not witnessed any error that he has made, nor have I ever heard an allegation against him.

Have I?:o :o :o You haven’t the time in your life to hear all I could tell you… Yes, I am a sinner. I have sinned many times and greatly. I have no halo… I will readily admit…that I, of all people, rely on the goodness and mercy of God for my forgiveness and Salvation.

Now, here’s where I lob a rock into the pond… and it is not directed at anyone in particular.

In another thread or post…I pointed out the fact that two very prominent Preachers of another denomination committed crimes and great sins…and both have paid a price for that here on earth.
But my whole point was that it is unfair to condemn or denigrate an entire Church, religion, denomination, creed, or any “group” based on the actions of the few. Its patently wrong. It is judgment of the basest kind.

The only instance that I can find that is justified to do so, is when said opinion or judgment is brought against any institution that has fomented, supported or initiated the evil on an institutional level. There is a significant difference between organized institutional evil and error, even evil deeds by an individual functioning on their own.

Peace!
 
RobHom;4031037]Evil is done by men. The Church does not promote or condone evil.
Perhaps you could illuminate us on these evil deeds?
The inqusititions that went on for centuries with the approval of the highest authority in the church is one example.
I think it goes without saying that Catholics are well aware of some of our more “colorful” people and chapters in history, and we readily admit that some were wrong.
Some were popes. Vicars of Christ.
Men will err, as to err is human. Perfection belongs only to God.
Can I say that my Pastor has erred? No, I cannot, because I have not witnessed any error that he has made, nor have I ever heard an allegation against him.
Have I?:o :o :o You haven’t the time in your life to hear all I could tell you… Yes, I am a sinner. I have sinned many times and greatly. I have no halo… I will readily admit…that I, of all people, rely on the goodness and mercy of God for my forgiveness and Salvation.
Now, here’s where I lob a rock into the pond… and it is not directed at anyone in particular.
In another thread or post…I pointed out the fact that two very prominent Preachers of another denomination committed crimes and great sins…and both have paid a price for that here on earth.
But my whole point was that it is unfair to condemn or denigrate an entire Church, religion, denomination, creed, or any “group” based on the actions of the few. Its patently wrong. It is judgment of the basest kind.
The only instance that I can find that is justified to do so, is when said opinion or judgment is brought against any institution that has fomented, supported or initiated the evil on an institutional level. There is a significant difference between organized institutional evil and error, even evil deeds by an individual functioning on their own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top