Vatican change of heart over 'barbaric' Crusades

[pro_universal]

Eden:

Some examples would be the insistence that Christianity spread “by the sword”, the assertion that the Crusades were “not moral”, the opposition to the Church’s “just war” doctrine and using the Inquisition as an example of the Church’s brutality IN MARKED CONTRAST TO a dearth of information on Christ, His divinity, what He taught, the Sacraments, the Bible as inspired, our call to follow Christ, discussion of the great witness of the saints, what Christ’s death and Resurrection mean for our salvation and so on.

Hey look, no quotes! Did you leave those out because posting the text of my comments would make your claims look watered down, or because you just didn’t have time?

1. Christianity has been spread by the sword. That doesn’t mean that the Church’s dogmatic teaching requires it. Admitting a pretty obvious historical fact is not “trashing the Church.”
2. I still assert that the crusades were not just wars, which leads to
3. Uh, how have I opposed the Just War tradition? I’m defending it here against cestusdei’s attack. Just wars do not involve nuking millions of people; that’s why I’m posting here.
4. I used the inquisition to point out that Christians had been intolerant of other religions under the guise of “preserving Christianity.” This is to show that it’s theoretically possible (surprise!) that even though terrorists claim to be muslims, they might not actually be following the religion. Bashing?

Again, I fail to see any proof that I’ve bashed the Church whatsoever.

Now, if we could kindly get back to the topic above…

 

[Eden]

My response is, are we called to proclaim the sins committed in His name or to proclaim the Gospel?

As far as the topic at hand, wasn’t the original topic about the Crusades? Somehow it has veered already: Al-Qaida, Palestinians, bin Laden, Israel, the BBC…

 

[pro_universal]

Eden:

My response is, are we called to proclaim the sins committed in His name or to proclaim the Gospel?

As far as the topic at hand, wasn’t the original topic about the Crusades? Somehow it has veered already: Al-Qaida, Palestinians, bin Laden, Israel, the BBC…

Thank you for abandoning the claim that I have bashed the Church. If you don’t think it’s proper to condemn a Priest who calls for nuking mecca and medina, then at least you should be proclaiming the Gospel on killing to him before you worry about the muslims.

The topic at hand above is just war, each of the list you presented has some relevance to figuring out what is and isn’t just.

 

[Eden]

pro_universal:

Thank you for abandoning the claim that I have bashed the Church. If you don’t think it’s proper to condemn a Priest who calls for nuking mecca and medina, then at least you should be proclaiming the Gospel on killing to him before you worry about the muslims.

The topic at hand above is just war, each of the list you presented has some relevance to figuring out what is and isn’t just.

I do believe you bash the Church and I just gave you examples of how.

1. the insistence that Christianity was spread “by the sword”
2. the assertion that the Crusades were “not moral”
3. the opposition to the Church’s “just war” doctrine
4. using the Inquisition as an example of the Church’s brutality

IN MARKED CONTRAST TO A DEARTH OF INFORMATION ON:

1. Christ
2. His divinity and what He taught
3. the Sacraments
4. the fact that the Bible is inspired
5. our call to follow Christ
6. discussion of the great witness of the saints
7. what Christ’s death and Resurrection mean for our salvation

I believe this is called “sin of omission”.

This is from an article in the CA library entitled “The Task of the Evangelist”:

First, dwelling on the problems in the modern Church may turn a prospective convert away. Most people naturally try to avoid conflict and confrontation. We do both the Church and the inquirer a grave disservice by dwelling on problems.

Second, dwelling on the Church’s problems shows a lack of faith. Certainly we have the sacramental graces of confirmation to fight the difficulties the Church faces, but head wagging and complaining show that we are “of little faith.” The Church is a living, breathing, divine organism; Christ is the soul who gives her life. Our complaining shows others that we either believe the Holy Spirit has lost control of the Church or that we never really believed he was in control in the first place. Such unintended attitudes are counterproductive to our work as evangelists.

Third, by focusing on the basics of evangelization instead of problems within the Church, we evangelists become a great force to overthrow the troublemakers in the Church. When we finally decide to evangelize instead of merely talking about it, we will swell the ranks of the laity and priesthood with unified orthodoxy until those of the heterodox bent have no choice but to either shut up and sit down or to be honest enough to leave and start their own religion. If we evangelists will work to put enough new, healthy blood in the Church, the diseased old blood will peter out altogether. When new converts, joined with the orthodox people already in the pews, become the majority and demand the orthodoxy we deserve, heterodoxy will slip into the shadows. We can retake our Church simply by obeying our Lord’s commission to evangelize all peoples.

catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0403fea4.asp

 

[pro_universal]

Well, you repeated the curious accusation that I’m opposing the just war tradition, and complain that I’m decrying the celebration of nuclear weapons and violence in the name of the Church…

If I didn’t condemn the hypocrisy and violence that’s coming from our Priest on this board, I’d be making a mockery of all the truth that it’s in the second half of your post, just like you do.

“What crimes? Don’t say anything about the fact that a priest is advocating murdering millions of people…just talk about the GOODNESS OF JESUS!”

This is insanity. Seriously.

 

[Contarini]

Eden:

Pro_universal, have you considered converting to Islam?

That’s ridiculous and insulting. Being aware (even hyper-sensitive) about the past faults of Christians is extremely Christian.

Whitewashing the past and launching ignorant polemics at members of other religions is what really hinders the spread of the Gospel.

Eden, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Edwin

 

[cestusdei]

pro, by your blind support of Islamic terrorists YOU advocate the murder of millions of Americans. You close your eyes to the deaths of Jewish children. There is absolutely nothing an Islamic terrorist can do that you will not find some excuse for. Oh, and your sources are all liberal, the NCR for God’s sake. You don’t accept my sources and I don’t accept yours. When a fellow Christian is in danger of being beheaded you ignore it and instead worry about me even though I don’t have any nukes in my possession. You ignore a REAL life and death situation because it doesn’t fit your template of “American bad…Terrorists good”. You debate theory while blood splashes all over you. Your only solution is to surrender and be nice dhimmi.

 

[pro_universal]

cestusdei:

pro, by your blind support of Islamic terrorists YOU advocate the murder of millions of Americans. You close your eyes to the deaths of Jewish children. There is absolutely nothing an Islamic terrorist can do that you will not find some excuse for. Oh, and your sources are all liberal, the NCR for God’s sake. You don’t accept my sources and I don’t accept yours. When a fellow Christian is in danger of being beheaded you ignore it and instead worry about me even though I don’t have any nukes in my possession. You ignore a REAL life and death situation because it doesn’t fit your template of “American bad…Terrorists good”. You debate theory while blood splashes all over you. Your only solution is to surrender and be nice dhimmi.

You’re not answering the questions I posed to you, you’re just repeating the same false accusation that I somehow support terrorism.

I’ll ask again, and this issue will not be dropped as long as you claim to be a Priest (and thus, a representative of Jesus himself):

Where in the Catholic authorities do you find support for your idea that it would be permissible to use nuclear weapons against muslim holy sites for any reason whatsoever?

 

[cestusdei]

You repeat the same things and so do I. You say I support millions of deaths and I say YOU support millions of deaths (they just happen to be Americans). I guess we’ll keep on keep in’ on. And you will keep on ignoring the REAL deaths that are happening right in front of you.

 

[pro_universal]

cestusdei:

You repeat the same things and so do I. You say I support millions of deaths and I say YOU support millions of deaths (they just happen to be Americans). I guess we’ll keep on keep in’ on. And you will keep on ignoring the REAL deaths that are happening right in front of you.

You are wrong, that’s the difference. You cannot find one iota of a suggestion that I support any killing in my posts here.

You, however, have explicitly supported the use of nuclear weapons, and you offer no justification for this vile position. You just keep accusing everyone else of being a terrorist who doesn’t agree with your hateful views.

This is totally unacceptable for a Priest, and I doubt that you are one.

 

[cestusdei]

I didn’t see you condemning Islamic terrorism. You don’t believe it exists. Jewish kids are killed and you yawn. A Christian is going to be beheaded and you yell at me. I don’t believe you are a Christian just a liberal.

 

[pro_universal]

cestusdei:

I didn’t see you condemning Islamic terrorism. You don’t believe it exists. Jewish kids are killed and you yawn. A Christian is going to be beheaded and you yell at me. I don’t believe you are a Christian just a liberal.

That’s because you were too busy hyperventilating and typing “Kill the muslims!” to read my posts.

How come you keep failing to offer up any justification for your views?

I post on the plight of Christians in Palestine, you call me a terrorist.

I ask you: Where is there Catholic support for the use of nuclear weapons? You call me a terrorist.

The whole of your response to my challenges has gone from “you’re a muslem” to “you’re a terrorist” to “you’re an appeaser” to “you’re a liberal.”

No label contains a defense for your views on nuclear weapons, and since you are a Representative of Jesus, I demand to know where in Christian teaching you find justification for supporting nuke attacks on muslim holy sites.

 

[Vaclav]

You ignore a REAL life and death situation because it doesn’t fit your template of “American bad…Terrorists good”. You debate theory while blood splashes all over you.

In fairness, when compared to other tragedies that occur on a global basis, international terrorism is rather poor in its efforts at killing people. In 2001, the year of the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. State Department recorded 3,295 deaths due to international terrorism. In 2003 there was slightly over 1,000 deaths due to international terrorism (mostly due to Chechnyan violence).

To put that in perspective, nearly 43,000 individuals died from car accidents in the United States alone. There were over 5,000 industrial fatalities in the United States alone.

Malaria causes roughly 1.3 million deaths per year. Or about 395 times as many deaths as the peak year of international terrorism in 2001. HIV claimed roughly 570,000 children last year, according to WHO, or about 173 times the fatalities of international terrorism in 2001.

Please don’t get me wrong. I am absolutely not saying that the deaths of anyone is not important. All life is important. What I am saying is that international terrorism is not the efficient slaughter machine that it is made out to be. In fact, fear and looking at them out of proportion with reality is exactly the reaction for which bin Laden could hope.

In reality there are a litany of other concerns that cost thousands and millions of more lives a year than Islamic terrorists.

 

[murtad]

cestusdei:

I didn’t see you condemning Islamic terrorism. You don’t believe it exists. Jewish kids are killed and you yawn. A Christian is going to be beheaded and you yell at me. I don’t believe you are a Christian just a liberal.

I would not call Pro_Universal a liberal as it is a compliment. It may be wise to call him a Marxist

Bishop of Hipo, St Augustine the African told us thousands years ago about people like Pro_Universal. He said Isaac represents the Church. Just like Isaac has two sons, Esav and Jacob, the Church too has two sons, one evil and one good.

So, Pro_Universal may be a member of the Church, yet he is an Edomite, a person who hates his inheritance. Just as Esav intermarried with Ishmael, our modern day Edomites defend Ishmaelites.

It was the Edomites who brought down the Roman Empire, gradually from Egypt, then Palestine, and then Assyria, and finally Constantinople in 1453 C.E. As you can see Ishmael is powerless yet Esav comes to the aid of Ishmael in his wars with Jacob.

 

[discipleofJesus]

murtad:

pro_universal:

No game here. Just a genuine interest in helping you to view history in such a way that you will not be hateful of other people, and so I challenge your views. You’re clearly free to expect a response from me if you present claims, and if I ask for the same, it’s so that I can help you to learn

.

You want to help us learn, but do you want to learn? You are so confused that you made a claim in the past that “race” is not “language”. St. Paul said there is no difference between Jew and Greek, and you dare to challenge the apostle! The fact is all humans come from common parents, Adam and Eve prove we are one people. Yet, we seem to be divided into “races”. So, what are these so-called “races”? Languages

Arabs as Arabs because they speak Arabic. Jews are Jews because they speak Hebrew. Greeks are Greeks because they speak Greek. So, language is ideology and therefore Arabism, Hellenism and Judaism should be deemed such.

murtad,
I think you accidentally accused pro_universal of saying something that I said. Also, you seem to have misunderstood what I said and what St Paul said and, as a result, overreacted with your response.