Larry King poll about Catholic Church

[blessedtoo]

The poll followed his show about the LA payout on the sex abuse cases. I watched the whole thing and the results are no surprise considering he had 3 victims and their completely anti-Catholic lawyer on talking about what had happened to them at the hands of priests. By the time the poll was announced halfway through the show, I almost voted unfavorably! It was extremely skewed and the only RCC representative was a priest that appears regularly on LK who did the best he could to present a balanced view.

I watch LK as a penance. I think someone should keep an eye on shows like this so we know how the Church is being portrayed in the secular media. LK is not exactly an expert on the RCC so his questions are banal. Hard to get articulate responses when the interviewer has no knowledge of the subject. LK also plays to the emotions - not the facts. He is not drawing a very large faithful Catholic demographic.

 

[cathgal]

I cannot understand the intensity at which uncharitable remarks spew forth on this board. You know, there ARE people on the other side of the computer at their keyboard, you are directing your comments too, right? Would you respond this way to them if they were discussing their feelings face to face?

If they show their ignorance without trying to learn the facts. There are people who thinks they know everything, when truth is, they never really bother to do the research. You can tell when a person is discussing intelligibly.

 

[cathgal]

Some have done plenty of research…YEARS of research, and came to a different conclusion than you do. To speak down to them is quite condesending.

I agree that there is ‘some’ exceptional few, but the majority is pretty much in the dark and I meant those majority.

For those some who’ve done ‘years’ of research, I don’t understand why they persist to be protestant cuz between Catholicism and Protestantism, it’s incomparable. If I was in such a state, reason would tell me to choose the one that has more credentials, and it’s not even rocket science !

Maybe it has something to do if they care for Truth or not.

 

[boppaid]

If they show their ignorance without trying to learn the facts. There are people who thinks they know everything, when truth is, they never really bother to do the research. You can tell when a person is discussing intelligibly.

Oh, absolutely. That doesn’t mean, however, that you point out their lack of intelligence. It’s simply unkind. I don’t see people doing that to you, so I can’t understand why you think it’s okay to point it out to others.

I’m not trying to “attack you” or anything, honestly. I just feel someone should stick up for people being insulted for simply stating their opinion on a debate board. Prove your point with facts, but you can do that without demeaning others.

I’ve read your other posts, and you seem like such a nice person, so I originally tried to point it out to you because I thought maybe you didn’t realize you were doing that. I guess you did realize it afterall.

 

[boppaid]

I agree that there is ‘some’ exceptional few, but the majority is pretty much in the dark and I meant those majority.

For those some who’ve done ‘years’ of research, I don’t understand why they persist to be protestant cuz between Catholicism and Protestantism, it’s incomparable. If I was in such a state, reason would tell me to choose the one that has more credentials, and it’s not even rocket science !

Maybe it has something to do if they care for Truth or not.

No, they care for the truth. They simply believe that Catholics do not have it. Believe me, they feel the same way you do about them about us! My friend is a pastor of a protestant church and he said that he couldn’t understand how anyone who reads Christian history could still be Catholic. This man spent years in the seminary, and is very well-read. It’s all relative and based on interpretation of both Scripture and history.

 

[mtr01]

Putting people on the defensive through triumphalistic statements is not the way to inspire conversion and/or transformation. Modeling the gospel as Francis did, and as Jesus did, in a non-confrontational way, is still the only way to show the beauty of the love of God.

Peace,

34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Yep, Our Lord was completely non-confrontational

 

[cathgal]

Oh, absolutely. That doesn’t mean, however, that you point out their lack of intelligence. It’s simply unkind. I don’t see people doing that to you, so I can’t understand why you think it’s okay to point it out to others.

To say they’re ignorant is pointing out ‘lack of intelligence’. Care to suggest a better word for ‘lack of intelligence’ ?

I’m not trying to “attack you” or anything, honestly. I just feel someone should stick up for people being insulted for simply stating their opinion on a debate board. Prove your point with facts, but you can do that without demeaning others…

I can understand what’s ‘opinion’ when I see it. But if it’s an opinion that I can correct w/ a factual statement, is that called ‘insult’ then ??

I’ve read your other posts, and you seem like such a nice person, so I originally tried to point it out to you because I thought maybe you didn’t realize you were doing that. I guess you did realize it afterall.

Maybe you’re a nice person no matter what and I’m just your opposite if correcting others for their ‘opinion’ is considered unkind.

 

[cathgal]

No, they care for the truth. They simply believe that Catholics do not have it. Believe me, they feel the same way you do about them about us! My friend is a pastor of a protestant church and he said that he couldn’t understand how anyone who reads Christian history could still be Catholic. This man spent years in the seminary, and is very well-read. It’s all relative and based on interpretation of both Scripture and history.

That’s too bad.

If facts don’t convince them, then reason should dictate.

Like why there are so many denoms existed and why theirs should be the true one. After all, why do any denoms exist in the first place. Is it because they are more a perfect human than others? If so, then there shouldn’t be any denoms after the very first one. Of course, this is only true if God can accept all sort of beliefs these denoms held. With all the confusion, no faith in Christianity would make more sense to me. I can go on…

 

[ncjohn]

Yep, Our Lord was completely non-confrontational

Yes, he was when it came to modeling the gospel message, which is what I said in the part you quoted.

Your quote is also totally inapplicable since it deals with the cost of discipleship, not confrontation. It is a simple statement that the gospel message will separate those who put God first from those who put “false gods” first and that those who put other things first are not fit to be called disciples.

If you believe you can force someone into believing something, I’d love to see some sources documenting such conversions. Jesus certainly did not attempt any such thing. In fact I cannot even recall a single occasion where he said "your faith has healed you; now go join the “one true church”. He never asked for a single conversion of religion that I can find; only a conversion of heart. It is the conversion of heart that will lead people to the Truth, and the container that holds it.

Peace,

 

[boppaid]

To say they’re ignorant is pointing out ‘lack of intelligence’. Care to suggest a better word for ‘lack of intelligence’ ?

Maybe rather than point out their lack of intelligence, you could skip it altogether. Just a thought…

Maybe you’re a nice person no matter what and I’m just your opposite if correcting others for their ‘opinion’ is considered unkind.

Oye. Correct others’ opinions all you want. I have no objection. Call them ignorant as well, if it makes you feel better. Spit in their face. Pull their hair. I don’t care.

I guess I should keep my nose out of it. But you wouldn’t believe the amont of people who I’ve talked with off the boards, via pm’ing and emailing, who are afraid to debate at CAF because of all the name calling and unkind debate tactics used. I thought I’d try to add a new perspective. I honestly didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers. Sorry.

 

[blessedtoo]

Yes, he was when it came to modeling the gospel message, which is what I said in the part you quoted.

Your quote is also totally inapplicable since it deals with the cost of discipleship, not confrontation. It is a simple statement that the gospel message will separate those who put God first from those who put “false gods” first and that those who put other things first are not fit to be called disciples.

If you believe you can force someone into believing something, I’d love to see some sources documenting such conversions. Jesus certainly did not attempt any such thing. In fact I cannot even recall a single occasion where he said "your faith has healed you; now go join the “one true church”. He never asked for a single conversion of religion that I can find; only a conversion of heart. It is the conversion of heart that will lead people to the Truth, and the container that holds it.

Peace,

In the story of the rich man who asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Christ confronts him and commands him to sell everything he owns and FOLLOW HIM. In fact, Christ told all His disciples to follow Him. The Catholic Church is Christ’s church so He was indeed commanding them to follow the “one true Church”.

 

[ncjohn]

In the story of the rich man who asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Christ confronts him and commands him to sell everything he owns and FOLLOW HIM. In fact, Christ told all His disciples to follow Him. The Catholic Church is Christ’s church so He was indeed commanding them to follow the “one true Church”.

No, he didn’t confront him. He answered the man’s direct question, and there was nothing confrontational about that.

When I speak of confrontation I am speaking of people getting in people’s faces in uncharitable ways rathering that acting out of love and in a loving way. And yes, I know about “tough love” and that there are times when loving and honest fraternal correction are necessary. There is a difference though between correcting a wayward brother and trying to bring about conversion through insult.

These boards, however, are filled with people who believe they can shame, coerce, or beat into submission people who disagree with them, often over the most trivial of things that are simply preferences. And the greater Church is also full of them, sticking their fingers in people’s chests and insulting them for not having a full understanding of the truth–as if any of us have such an understanding. It is those kinds of attitudes, often leading even to violence, that cause many people to have a less than rosy perception of the Church.

I willl continue to maintain that Jesus would not have condoned any such thing, and did not practice any such thing. As the Son of God, he showed infinite love and mercy in every action. Even in confronting the Pharisees over their blindness, he confronted only their self-righteous belief that they could be saved by the law–the same belief that is implied by many here when they start implying that one isn’t worthy if they (pick your favorite): receive communion standing/kneeling; on the tongue/in the hand; do or don’t wear a head covering; prefer Latin/vernacular; accept/condemn the death penalty; ad nauseum. In the end, I bet there are plenty of Catholics who have a negative opinion of much of the Catholic Church after their experiences with “Church people”. I myself left the Church for many years over the kinds of attitudes I ran into that so contradicted gospel values.

I won’t belabor the point any further. I didn’t expect a warm reception in pointing out that many of our wounds are self-inflicted, and that we often induce the negative perception some have of us. That is not to say that we as individuals, and the Church as a whole, don’t have an abundance of good things to offer also. It is just a recognition that human nature is to focus on the negative and form our perceptions from there. It’s unfortunately especially prevalent in the Headline News, “sound bite” mentality of the culture we live in.

Peace,

 

[Philothea53]

Yes, he was when it came to modeling the gospel message, which is what I said in the part you quoted.

Your quote is also totally inapplicable since it deals with the cost of discipleship, not confrontation. It is a simple statement that the gospel message will separate those who put God first from those who put “false gods” first and that those who put other things first are not fit to be called disciples.

If you believe you can force someone into believing something, I’d love to see some sources documenting such conversions. Jesus certainly did not attempt any such thing. In fact I cannot even recall a single occasion where he said "your faith has healed you; now go join the “one true church”. He never asked for a single conversion of religion that I can find; only a conversion of heart. It is the conversion of heart that will lead people to the Truth, and the container that holds it.

Peace,

Isn’t this like where Jesus said to (was it) the disciples? if you go into a town and they don’t want you, shake the dust off your sandals and move on? Was he telling us to not force the truth on others?

 

[TraditionalCath]

Larry King has a poll about the Catholic Church, when I saw it early this morning it showed that 79% of the voters had an UNFAVORABLE view of the Church.

Here is a link if you care to look at (or take) the poll: cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/

When I saw the poll:

• 882 voters had a favorable view
• 3382 voters had an unfavorable view
• 4268 total voters took the poll

why worry about what the polls say? simply concentrate on the faith, and live your life pleasing to God and remember that nothing else matters except your love for God, your family, and the faith.

don’t worry about polls. they are irrelevant and a waste of your precious time.

 

[Philothea53]

why worry about what the polls say? simply concentrate on the faith, and live your life pleasing to God and remember that nothing else matters except your love for God, your family, and the faith.

don’t worry about polls. they are irrelevant and a waste of your precious time.

I agree. Polls are for politicians - when they agree with what the polls say!

 

[cathgal]

Maybe rather than point out their lack of intelligence, you could skip it altogether. Just a thought… .

Well, if you skip it, then the message to them is there’s nothing to learn and what they think they know is right. You may love to hear *protests, *but I don’t. Our duty is to bear witness to the Truth, and sometimes, it can be harsh.

Oye. Correct others’ opinions all you want. I have no objection. Call them ignorant as well, if it makes you feel better. Spit in their face. Pull their hair. I don’t care. .

Now you’re exaggerating

I guess I should keep my nose out of it. But you wouldn’t believe the amont of people who I’ve talked with off the boards, via pm’ing and emailing, who are afraid to debate at CAF because of all the name calling and unkind debate tactics used. I thought I’d try to add a new perspective. I honestly didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers. Sorry.

I’m open to new ideas if I think it would help.

 

[sajeev]

SYRIAC ORTHODOX PATRIARCH OF ANTIOCH IS THE ACTUAL SUCCESSOR OF ST. PETER

From Bible We Know That Our Lord Has Given The Authority To

St.peter. Our Lord Says That He Will Build His Church On

Peter.
In The First Centuries, Bishop Of Antioch Was Superior To

All The Other Bishops In Rome And Alexandria. His Territory

Extended To All The Then Known Parts Of The World. Entire

Persia, India, Middle East, China Was Under The Control Of

Patriarch Of Antioch. If We Go Through The Historical

Documents He Was Regarded As The Succesor Of St. Peter. We

Can See Around 7 Letters Written By Ignatius, Bishop Of

Antioch To 7 Churches.
In The First Centuries There Was A Dispute Between Rome And

Antioch About The Successor Of Peter. If We Check The Bible,

There Is Nothing Said About The Authority Of Pope Or Rome.

Even You Check The Letter Of Paul To Romans. Nothing Is

Mentioned About The Primacy Of Roman Church.
There Is No Evidence That Peter Had Gone To Rome.
From Bible We Can Find That It Is Paul Who Had Founded The

Church Of Rome.
In The 4th And Fifth Centuries, Because Of The Influence Of

Byzantine Emperors, A New Patriarch Emerged At

Constantinople. Then The Emperor Tried To Destroy The Church

At Antioch. The Gave The Superiority To Patriarch Of

Constantinople.
In 1451, The Council Of Chalcedon Declared That The Pope Of

Rome Leo Is The Succesosr Of Peter And Head Of The Church.
After All These Events, In The 5th Century The Patriarch Of

Antioch Severus Was Deposed By The Byzantine Emperor. Those

Persons Who Accepted Pope Of Rome As The Head Were Appointed

As Bishops Of Antioch.
If We Check The Tradition And Liturgy Of Churches In India

And Middle East, We Can See That They Are Following

Antichene Tradition.
As A Result Proclaiming The Superiority Of Patriarch Of

Antioch, Jacob A Bishop Appointed Sergius Of Tella As The

Bishop Of Antioch. The Jacobite Patriarchs Then Came. They

Are The Actual Head Of The Christian Church.
We Must Know That These Europeans Are Actually Barbarians.

They Have No Culture. Now Also We Can See This. It Is Sure

That These Americans And Europeans Are Engahged In Sex With

Many People Even Before 13 Years Of Age. It Means That They

Have A Barbarian Tradition. But They Are Controllingt The

Economy Of The Whole World. They Are Propagating The Pope Of

Rome As Successor Of Peter. That Is Necessary For Their

Superiority And Existence Of Economic Power.
We Must Know The Fact That The Entire Middle East, Persia

Was Christian Before The 6 Th Century. They Were Under

Patriarch Of Antioch. Because Of Many Wars And Attack Of

Islam, Forceful Conversion By Islam Christianity In Middle

East, Persia Have Got Destroyed. The Patriarch Of Antioch

Was Under The Supervision Of Islamic Rulers.
The Colonial Invasion By British, Portugese , Dutch ,french

Resulted In The Forceful Conversion Of Those Who Were Under

The Control Of Patriarch Of Antioch To Roman Pope.
For Example, Portugese Forcefully Converted Christians Under

Antioch In India To Rome. French Forcefully Converted

Christians In Iraq Under Antioch To Roman Pope.
Through These 2000 Years It Is The Patriarch Of Antioch Who

Suffered Most. He Was In Caves Or Forests For Many Centuries

In Fear Of European Powers, Muslims, Byzantines.
If We Look At The History Of Roman Popes , Many Had

Children, Many Had Married, Many Had Children Before

Marriage, Many Became Popes At The Age Of 12 Or 13.
The Documents Now Qwe Have Proclaiming The Authority Of

Rome, Are All Fake. They Are False Documents Created During

The Reign Of Charlemagne, The 8 Th Century Roman Emperor Who

Saved Rome From Muslims.
The Reason Why All Are Proclaiming The Roman Pope Is Money

Only. The Roman Catholics Are Getting A Large Amount Money

From Europe. The Patriarch Of Anticoh Has Nothing.
In Short , The Patriarch Of Antioch Is The Successsor Of St.

Peter And Head Of The Church.
Now The Roman Pope Is Benedict 16. He Is One Of The Great

Persons Living In This World. He Is One Of The Great

Scholars In This Century. He Knows The Fact That Anticoh

Patriarch Is The Actual Head. From His Moves, We Have Got

The Perception That Something Will Take Place Soon. All The

Bishops And Historians In This World Know The Fact That

Patriarch Of Antioch Is The Peter’s Successor.

But Money Can Make A False True.
Reply With Quote

 

[Memaw]

so protestants are godless? and you gotta be a liberal?

interesting…the catholic church is always the victim seems. you would never know different on this board.

everyone else is the son of satan.

He didn’t say that Protestants were godless, he said godless liberals and protestants dislike the Catholic Church, and that is a true statement.They both dislike the Catholic Church and if you don’t believe me, just ask many protestants or godless liberals. No one said everyone else is the son of satan, those words came out of your typewritter.

 

[Memaw]

I have left the Catholic Church, but I am certainly not godless (Godless) nor am I liberal. I am pretty conservative. Maybe the Catholic Church is the only true church but none of us will really know until we leave this earth. In the meantime, let’s not bash those who disagree.

Oh yes, some of us Do know BEFORE we leave this earth, its a bit to late if we find out after we die. Evidently you didn’t know your Catholic Faith very well or I don’t believe you would leave it so easily.