My response to RisenAgain

[Peter_J]

An open letter to RisenAgain:

Dear RisenAgain,

RisenAgain:

I was almost completely convinced, and decided that through much fasting and prayer, I would consult one last source of “reliable” Catholic information- CAF.

When I got here, a few days ago, I immediately began to read. All I saw on every page was ignorance, blasphemy, and ad hominem attacks laden with double standards and logical fallacies.

As I began to question these fallacies - I received no care; no healthy response. All I got was a bunch of aimless, inaccurate and unauthorized rebuke, layered in rows of exclamation marks.

All these Catholics kept doing, was repeating the same 'ol defeated and stale arguments over and over. None would seriously engage with me about my concerns, and what’s more - they continued to make private judgments, and eternal verdicts on all Protestants! This is clearly blasphemy. Not to mention groundless.

So through all of this – I just wish to say – Thank you CAF for finally confirming to my soul that Roman Catholicism is an apostate harlot – and no true bride of Christ. Honestly I couldn’t have done it without you!

The final revelation of this truth was the plain reality that Roman Catholics are completely inconsistent with their own theology and yet they consistently accuse Protestants that their theology is inconsistent. (pun intended)!

I’ve said it before, but never more earnestly than right now, that I believe that if you look at a sampling of typical Protestant forums, you’ll find that the way Protestants are treated on CAF is as good or better than the way Catholics are treated on Protestant forums.

You do make some good points in the above quote. I won’t go through it line-by-line to say what I agree with and what I don’t, but I would like to comment on one paragraph:

RisenAgain:

As I began to question these fallacies - I received no care; no healthy response. All I got was a bunch of aimless, inaccurate and unauthorized rebuke, layered in rows of exclamation marks.

This, surely, is an over-generalization. No care? No healthy response?

I like to think that I myself shared some pretty good thoughts with you in our conversation about the rosary, but that’s really beside the point. Whether I personally did or didn’t, I find it very hard to believe that no one did.

RisenAgain:

FOR INSTANCE - I noticed this comment from a Protestant brother - and I also noticed that there was not a single Catholic brother (or sister) of ours, including me - that could adequately answer it:

Catholics tell Protestants that they cannot know what is, and what is not Sacred Scripture without the Catholic Church right? So the Protestant has an unsolvable dilemma trying to figure out what constitutes Scripture - without an infallible teaching magisterium.

So far so logical . . . right?

But then, the question becomes - How can Protestants – or Catholics – for that matter, know what constitutes the Church? The Watchtower Society, the Mormons, and the Holy Roman Catholic Church have the same claim. This creates a huge dilemma for Catholics - and puts them in the same boat as they wish to put Protestants!

Catholics have created a double standard!

If Catholics answer - Well we have three witnesses;

One is sacred Scripture . . . Protestants can immediately answer:

“Well how do you know what constitutes sacred Scripture without first knowing what constitutes the Church, for the Church defines Scripture. By using Scripture for one of your sources that teaches you what constitutes the Church, you only prove that one can actually know what is Scripture apart from the Church!”

If Catholics answer - Well we also have sacred Tradition . . . Protestants can immediately answer:

“Well how do you know what constitutes sacred Tradition without first knowing what constitutes the Church, for it is the Church that defines Tradition. By going to Tradition - one presupposes that they already know what constitutes the Church, for Tradition comes from the Church!”

If Catholics answer - Well we also have history . . . Protestants can immediately answer:

“History according to who? History also must be interpreted. Should we take the Protestant perspective of history - the Orthodox perspective - or the Jewish? And if we look to history - how do we even know that the sources that we look to are reliable sources? Doesn’t the Church have to tell us which historical sources are acceptable? But if we are still trying to figure out what constitutes the Church - then we have no Church to tell us!”

You see- Catholics think they have it all figured out - but they do not. They are simply masters at setting double standards. This is why, I suspect, we see a high level of anger coming from our Catholic friends on this forum.

They are frustrated and do not even know why.

Maybe they ought to stop pretending that they know it all, and begin to open their minds a little, and at least hear the Protestant brethren out.

I am saying – If you are a Catholic; you ought to at least let Protestants speak for themselves; Just listen. Just think. Be slow to answer - lest you find yourself digging your own theology into a pit, laden with double standards, logical fallacies, and ad- hominem methodologies.

If you expect your Protestant brethren to scrutinize their theology and examine it with a critical eye - ought not you to do the same before accusing the beloved and blood-bought children of my Heavenly Father?

I know the thread your talking about. I thought that the OP made some good points, and I said, adding that perhaps we (meaning Catholics and Protestants) are more alike than we think. To this, as I recall, the OP responded “Don’t flatter yourself.”

 

[Cinette]

I remember RisenAgain and his posting. I did my best to respond but he is stubborn.

I do wish to respond to this thread so hold it for me. I have a Conference to prepare for and must dash.

Will revert

 

[chris_molter]

Wow, I’m convinced by his overwhelming logic and example of Christian living. Let’s leave the Apostate Harlot, folks!

 

[Cinette]

Hi RisenAgain

I went back to our last exchange on another thread and re-read your post and wish to make some observations

You should know that we only have 20 minutes and 6000 words so I could not possibly repeat your entire post! You accuse me of being “rude and manipulative” for “chopping your statements” and that I was to “keep my comments in line”. You were more interested in what you had to say than what I had to say!! This is evident.

Have you ever had the experience when you talk to some people instead of listening to what you are saying you can see they are already working out what they are going to say next?? Well, that is what you were doing. You were not taking in what I was saying, you were more concerned in what you said and that I “chopped” some of your post! Don’t forget that is was my post and I am not obliged to repeat your entire post!

First I think you must show some humility and go back and reflect on what I have said. If I repeated some of the things you believe in I apologise. I myself am not a fully mature Catholic. I am a revert who is learning about my faith. I answered your post in the first place because I detected an inner anger and I thought that I might be able to quell that anger. Instead, I only made things worse.

As for the “whole truth” we will probably only have that when we enter Eternal Life. We do have the full truth of the Christian faith as handed down by the Apostles. The Magisterium, which is our teaching authority, is inspired and guided by the H Spirit as you know. Double standards? No I think you must re-think your position in that regard.

Apostolic Succession has complemented the teaching of the Apostles whereby through the Doctors of the Church and the Teaching Authority the scriptures have been studied and defined down the ages. The Apostles never spoke of the Trinity or the Incarnation - this was developed over time through the study of the scriptures as these concepts were embedded in the scriptures.

You said: *“Please - take your time to consider - and do not be so arrogant. It is posts like yours that give us a bad rep among Protestants who have the slightest bit of wisdom and logic!” *-

I do not think I can be accused of arrogance because I am fully aware of my limitations. I am merely trying very hard to help you understand something which I believe I do.

I believe that Jesus thought of everything before he bade farewell to the Apostles before his Ascension. He empowered the Apostles and promised to send the HS to guide them. He instructed them and demonstrated his Holy Power. He promised that he would never leave us. All these promises have been kept. I don’t believe that Jesus would have forgotten anything. He knew how weak and vulnerable we are. So the HSpirit is always with us.

Finally, I can see that you are a thinker but your inner rage is blinding you. So calm down and pray that the Holy Spirit will help you find the answers you seek.

Blessings

.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

An open letter to RisenAgain:

Dear RisenAgain,

I’ve said it before, but never more earnestly than right now, that I believe that if you look at a sampling of typical Protestant forums, you’ll find that the way Protestants are treated on CAF is as good or better than the way Catholics are treated on Protestant forums.

I agree with this on the whole​

You do make some good points in the above quote. I won’t go through it line-by-line to say what I agree with and what I don’t, but I would like to comment on one paragraph:

This, surely, is an over-generalization. No care? No healthy response?

I like to think that I myself shared some pretty good thoughts with you in our conversation about the rosary, but that’s really beside the point. Whether I personally did or didn’t, I find it very hard to believe that no one did.

I know the thread your talking about. I thought that the OP made some good points, and I said, adding that perhaps we (meaning Catholics and Protestants) are more alike than we think.

This is a fact. To deny it is to undermine the Evangelical understanding of the Gospel, since the lack of difference between the elect & the non-elect is fundamental to the grace of God. If Evangelicals deserve salvation & “others” do not, it follows necessarily that the Evangelical Gospel is based on self-righteousness, & not on the gracious Righteousness of Christ. This is the polar opposite of salvation by grace alone. It is the attitude of the Pharisee in Luke 18. Catholics & Evangelicals are equally lost & graceless without Christ - there is no room for boasting at all, so there is no room for ideology.​

Not for the first time, the Gospel is undermined by being used as an anti-Catholic ideology This is a typically Fundamentalist habit

To this, as I recall, the OP responded “Don’t flatter yourself.”

Leaving RA out of things, ISTM that the points made in the post quoted are good ones. Who makes them, is not important.​

Since one can read only so many threads, I have no idea what else was said; but as it stands, the OP’s points seem perfectly fair. The one exception, that could have been left out without weakening his case, is the unflattering description of the CC From some POVs, that is what it looks like.

The problem is, that for some Christians the diabolical character of the CC appears to be an essential part of the Gospel; the Good News is, on this reading, in part the Good News of the destruction of Catholicism - salvation by Christ appears to include this as a necessary consequence. Rejection of Catholicism would thus be, not an addition to it which that sort of Christianity would be all the healthier for losing, but an essential part of Christian discipleship. Therefore, God says all that “harlot church” stuff; God is “anti-Catholic”. How do we know God hates Catholicism ? The Bible says so, & what the Bible says, God says.

If that is how the Gospel is understood, any understanding of the Gospel which does not include the Good News that God will destroy “Romanism” is an incomplete & false Gospel. So to expect people to drop the anti-Catholicism may amount to asking them to do something which - from their POV - falsifies the Gospel.

That’s how some Christians seem to think anyway; if they won’t analyse their beliefs, others must try to. That’s my try; AFAICS it fits with the attitudes many Christians express. Some do not like being called Protestants, which does not help; because Protestant churches are in their eyes no better than Catholicism - this suggests influence from Dispensationalism, in which the apostasy of the visible Church is an essential element; otherwise, the Rapture loses much of its point.

 

[churchcamefirst]

RISENAGAIN IS NOT CATHOLIC, BUT HERE IN DISGUISE. I HAVE HAD A PM FROM A GOOD SOURCE HERE AT CAF AND HE TELLS ME HE IS NOT CATHOLIC. THIS EXPLAINS HIS ATTITUDE AND THE FACT THAT HE MUST START OUT ALL HIS POSTS AS "I AS A CATHOLIC ETC…"
How many more are here in disguise?

 

[Cinette]

RISENAGAIN IS NOT CATHOLIC, BUT HERE IN DISGUISE. I HAVE HAD A PM FROM A GOOD SOURCE HERE AT CAF AND HE TELLS ME HE IS NOT CATHOLIC. THIS EXPLAINS HIS ATTITUDE AND THE FACT THAT HE MUST START OUT ALL HIS POSTS AS "I AS A CATHOLIC ETC…"
How many more are here in disguise?

If this is true then it explains why, despite exhaustive explanations, keeps insisting in his original question! He completely ignores the evidence.

I find that dishonest. However, even if he is in disguise, he has a mind and can reason. Perhaps if he took the time and effort to really read and reflect he might arrive at the conclusion that he has been presented with some compelling arguments. After all, he cannot be a robot, that is not possible.