Virulent anti-Catholicism of 1837

[dianaiad]

To be perfectly honest i think whenever the church is being persecuted (most of the time) it means that the church is doing it’s job because there is a huge gap now between the church’s (God’s) law and the world’s view on things. Which saint actually said he preferred the church under persecution because it kept those within it pure? or something along those lines…

The criticism and attacks will never end, we have to remain strong!

The problem with that position is, of course, then you have to say that every church/belief system that is being persecuted is ‘doing its job.’ It is natural for everyone who is BEING persecuted to use that very persecution as evidence that they are ‘true.’

When in reality, it is only that they are different. People dislike ‘different,’ and distrust it.

Frankly, though, that Saint who made the comment to which you are referring…and believe me, I do NOT know who that was…is correct; it is easier to turn to God when everybody else has turned away from you.

There are lots of truisms that apply here, but a couple of oldies that I made up are: “nothing cements an idea like opposition to it” and “nobody ever switched religions because his own was sufficiently insulted.”

These two statements seem to be solid gold truths—I wonder why so many people seem to ignore them?

 

[dianaiad]

You are right. It is a maturing experience to respond to those criticisms. We change and purify ourselves when we respond to those criticisms, especially those that are valid. They only cry and claim persecution when we tell them to clean their own stables.

Interesting. It is a maturing experience to BE persecuted…is that why you think it is a good idea to 'tell them to clean their own stables" (that is, persecute them)? Because you think it will be a maturing experience?

 

[PaulDupre]

Dianad,
I noticed no “*” next to “The Passion of the Christ”. By all means, see it!

–kc

Mormons aren’t allowed to see *The Passion of the Christ *- it’s rated R.

 

[Louie1983]

The problem with that position is, of course, then you have to say that every church/belief system that is being persecuted is ‘doing its job.’ It is natural for everyone who is BEING persecuted to use that very persecution as evidence that they are ‘true.’

When in reality, it is only that they are different. People dislike ‘different,’ and distrust it.

Frankly, though, that Saint who made the comment to which you are referring…and believe me, I do NOT know who that was…is correct; it is easier to turn to God when everybody else has turned away from you.

There are lots of truisms that apply here, but a couple of oldies that I made up are: “nothing cements an idea like opposition to it” and “nobody ever switched religions because his own was sufficiently insulted.”

These two statements seem to be solid gold truths—I wonder why so many people seem to ignore them?

Yes other church’s have been persecuted but none more than the Catholic hurch simply because it’s the oldest church in christianity (it’s been here longer, therefore has been exposed to more persecution), catholics, protestants, lutherans etc i.e christianity as a whole is targeted because some of christianity’s teachings are in direct contrast to the view that the world has espoused. No-one likes to hear the about accepting responsibility of their actions and being told that their ways are sinful.

 

[dianaiad]

I suppose they are about as Catholic as “Oceans 11-13” are Mormon.

Well yeah Diana, most of those films are older than 10 years. That is ancient in the Hollywood time frame.

Well I thank you for cherry picking out a few of the actual Hollywood films, with Therese thrown in there to pretend like you didn’t. Of the group you weeded out, 4 were made in the last ten years. Of those, one was Mel Gibson’s ode to his faith (which he has spun off as the “Church of Mel”). “Therese” was put out by a Catholic film company, I own it on DVD. I saw the one woman play that goes along with it. It’s about like saying “The Work and the Glory” was not anti-Mormon. “Return to Me”, good film, I agree. “We Were Soldiers” I have not seen.

I don’t have time to go through the whole list. The Sound of Music…a singing nun with a stern Mother who leaves her order to marry…it’s a swell movie but the Catholic part is more like a prop. “Ten Commandments”, that one put a smile on my face. If that one isn’t anti-Catholic then it also is not anti-Jewish or anti-Mormon, as last I checked, Mormons still believed in the story of Moses. You can add that to your list of films that aren’t anti-Mormon! And “Ben Hur”, that one is a stretch as well. “A Man for All Season” was originally a play, turned into a film. Hollywood also equals screenplay is Hollywood in origin.

You can go hunting for the anti-Catholic films now if you like. lol

I actually haven’t seen any anti-Catholic films. (shrug) At least, not any films that have been identified as such. Come to think of it, I wouldn’t go to one, knowingly.

As to the list…one more time, Rebecca; that’s not my list. I didn’t compile it.

That’s YOUR list.

I got it from a Catholic website, (referenced in the first post) which listed the top 100 movies that had:
a: specific references to Catholic doctrine (for the sword and sandal stuff) or Catholic priests/nuns (for anything set after about AD 100) and
b: portrayed the doctrine, priests/nuns/Catholic life in a “positive and uplifting manner.”

NOT merely “not anti-Catholic,” in other words, but strongly PRO-Catholic.

Jerusha’s plaint was that there weren’t ANY movies out there that portrayed Catholics or Catholic priests in a positive manner, so I went to a Catholic site and pulled their list. So if there is any cherry picking going on, you guys are the ones picking the fruit.

One. More. Time; this is a CATHOLIC site that recommends these movies as PRO-Catholic. I gave y’all the list because Jerusha claimed that there weren’t any. In fact, there are a lot of 'em.

As to you wanting to throw out anything not made within the last ten years as somehow not worthy…look, Rebecca, what is your problem here? I’m beginning to think that you are actually insulted that major motion picture studios have made movies that portray Catholics and Catholic priests in a positive manner!

As to 'The Sound of Music…" When was the last time you saw that? You miss the part where they referenced the way Catholic convents aided refugees from Hitler’s regime? As for your snarky comment about the Mother Superior telling Maria to get married; c’mon, Rebecca; I’m a Mormon and even I know that one shouldn’t become a nun if one doesn’t honestly feel the call; becoming a wife and mother is as honorable and blessed a choice to make. At least that’s what the last priest I talked to said about it.

As for your not having time to go through the whole list…you probably should have done at least as much research as I did before you dismissed the entire list as ‘cherry picking’ Indy films made 'by Catholics for Catholics." I will admit, that one gave me a good case of the giggles…as if John Wayne, Victor Mature, Jean Simmons, Bing Crosby, Richard Burton et. al ever did anything BUT mainstream movies. Something about the contracts they all had with the major studios they worked for…

I’m sorry that you see all these Oscar winning movies that protray Catholicism in a 'positive and uplifting manner" (not my quote, that’s from the website that listed the titles) as being, in reality, insulting to you. (shrug) I’m not exactly sure how you could catagorize “Going My Way” as merely ‘not anti-Catholic,’ but I guess that’s your problem.

 

[dianaiad]

Dianad,
I noticed no “*” next to “The Passion of the Christ”. By all means, see it!

–kc

I’ll pass on that.

Not because it is rated “R,” but because I don’t think I could handle watching what I am told is an extremely graphic portrayal of His crucifixion. Nothing against the movie…in this case, it’s ALL about what I don’t think I am ready to deal with, for many different reasons…none of which have to do with my religious beliefs, but do have to do with Mel Gibson’s insistence upon graphically realistic film making and my own ability to deal with it.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Jerusha, thanks for posting this. I have read through most of it. Yeah, this is the anti-Catholicism that restorationism arose out of. I think it humorous that the followers of this restorationist tradition cry “persecution” in a thread that is about the very foundations of their religions.

I didn’t mean to hijack your thread. The same anti-Catholicism is seen today. I am a “film person” and that is where I most readily see it, in media. As I also have a background in the publishing industry.

Diana, it isn’t possible for me to explain to you the sublteties of film making, the different origins of stories and the story tellers. Some is art and some is just plain ****. Every film you posted I could spend 20 minutes gathering background information, most relevant are the screenwriters and directors, as that is where the story comes from, and reasons it is being the told. Some art, jolts you out of your comfort zone, and can come across as “anti”, and perhaps at the root it is, but it there is also the possibility that there is another story being told. I am not a knee-jerk reactionist to Catholic portrayal in film, but I have been at the ground level of film making and I know **** when I see it. “September Dawn” is ****, and definitely anti-Mormon. However, the screen writer specifically has said he wanted to show how religion in general influences society in general for ill. So, your Mormon story was used against all religion. Congratulations.

The story Jerusha has posted here is a story of absolute anti-Catholicism. Which, is nearly the foundation of the US itself, as “religious freedom” meant being free of the “evils of popery” and/or the Church of England. Mormonism arose out this same brew with direct ties to the Campbellite movement.

Your cries of “Mormon persecution”, while having some foundation, pale in comparison to your required belief that Catholicism is an abomination and those of us who profess her creeds are corrupt. The roots of this story lie in what Jerusha has posted. But I doubt that you have read it. Instead you chase down Catholics lists of film which are quite frankly, meaningless to me. I have a brain and quite frankly I am a film snob, and so no, that is not my list. Most of those films I wouldn’t take seriously enough to be offended. You can put the Dan Brown inspired films in that group.

 

[dianaiad]

Yes other church’s have been persecuted but none more than the Catholic hurch simply because it’s the oldest church in christianity (it’s been here longer, therefore has been exposed to more persecution), catholics, protestants, lutherans etc i.e christianity as a whole is targeted because some of christianity’s teachings are in direct contrast to the view that the world has espoused. No-one likes to hear the about accepting responsibility of their actions and being told that their ways are sinful.

I’m not going to argue about the persecution that Catholics have historically received, because you have.

HOWEVER…from about the time of Constantine (d.337 AD) until the time of Henry the 8th,(separation from Rome 1533) --about 1200 years, the Catholics were not so much the persecuted as the persecutors…and you guys were very, very good at it. You did not suffer dissension, heretics, pagans or anybody else of a different religious opinion. what you guys did to the Jews…whew.

…Even after Henry did his smash and grab with church property, the Catholics got a good lick or two in…“Bloody Mary” was not called that because she liked tomato juice in her vodka, but because upon gaining the throne of England, she proceeded to merrily burn hundreds of 'heretics" (Protestants…) at the stake. Elizabeth stopped that.

Yes, the Catholics have suffered persecution since then, but not in any place where they are the majority. What you guys did to South America–goodness. Where you are in the minority, yep, you get it. You get it HARD.

…and the Catholics who are being persecuted absolutely do not deserve it. I have to sit back and wonder, though…I wonder if that which you feel coming around is the harvest of what went around? Unfair as the idea is, it’s worth a thought.

After all, that’s the logic being used when Catholics (and others) justify the sort of stuff that was done to the Mormons…

 

[RebeccaJ]

All I can say is: wow.

 

[dianaiad]

Jerusha, thanks for posting this. I have read through most of it. Yeah, this is the anti-Catholicism that restorationism arose out of. I think it humorous that the followers of this restorationist tradition cry “persecution” in a thread that is about the very foundations of their religions.

I didn’t mean to hijack your thread. The same anti-Catholicism is seen today. I am a “film person” and that is where I most readily see it, in media. As I also have a background in the publishing industry.

Diana, it isn’t possible for me to explain to you the sublteties of film making, the different origins of stories and the story tellers.

Oh, do try, Rebecca. After all, I MIGHT be able to understand you if you dumb it down enough.

After all, my BA is only in English with a minor in Communications (film history), my MA is in English, I"ve only been working in the community theater and film industry for 35 years. If you promise to use small words and go light on the jargon, I’ll try to keep up.

Some is art and some is just plain ****. Every film you posted I could spend 20 minutes gathering background information, most relevant are the screenwriters and directors, as that is where the story comes from, and reasons it is being the told. Some art, jolts you out of your comfort zone, and can come across as “anti”, and perhaps at the root it is, but it there is also the possibility that there is another story being told. I am not a knee-jerk reactionist to Catholic portrayal in film, but I have been at the ground level of film making and I know **** when I see it. “September Dawn” is ****, and definitely anti-Mormon. However, the screen writer specifically has said he wanted to show how religion in general influences society in general for ill. So, your Mormon story was used against all religion. Congratulations.

WHAT are you talking about? OK we both agree that “September Dawn” is garbage. So did the reviewers. THE LIST I JUST POSTED IS NOT MY LIST. It’s a CATHOLIC list, posted by a respected CATHOLIC publication, of films that CATHOLICS are recommending as movies that portray Catholicism is an uplifting manner.

The story Jerusha has posted here is a story of absolute anti-Catholicism. Which, is nearly the foundation of the US itself, as “religious freedom” meant being free of the “evils of popery” and/or the Church of England. Mormonism arose out this same brew with direct ties to the Campbellite movement.

The only ties we have to the Campbellite movement are some of the converts. We do not share doctrine or ideas with them. Indeed, the only reason we share the word ‘restorationist’ with them is because they like the word. As to Jerusha’s story of 'absolute anti-CAtholicism…" I find that ironic. SHE claims that there are no pro-CAtholic movies out there. I post a long list that I got from a Catholic website of pro-Catholic movies. You dismiss the majority of them because they are over ten years old and therefore don’t count, and yet you are talking now about a religious movement that is close to 200 years old.

You don’t seem to be bothered by a need to be consistent.

Your cries of “Mormon persecution”, while having some foundation, pale in comparison to your required belief that Catholicism is an abomination and those of us who profess her creeds are corrupt.

Uh huh. You really are saying that murder, rape, arson, theft, tarring and feathering, the driving out of people in the dead of winter and the proclamation of Boggs Extermination Order ‘pales in comparison’ to saying that the creeds are corrupt and that there was an apostacy?

Great googly moogly, Rebecca.

The roots of this story lie in what Jerusha has posted. But I doubt that you have read it. Instead you chase down Catholics lists of film which are quite frankly, meaningless to me. I have a brain and quite frankly I am a film snob, and so no, that is not my list. Most of those films I wouldn’t take seriously enough to be offended. You can put the Dan Brown inspired films in that group.

I don’t think so.

I repeat, Rebecca. This is a list of films that the CATHOLICS recommend to CATHOLICS as being pro-CATHOLIC, and as portraying CATHOLICISM in an uplifting and positive manner.

I happen to agree that the films in that list that I saw do exactly that. Whether they are smack dab accurate or not is another question–and one that I, as a non-Catholic, can’t answer. I CAN say that none of those movies make people leave the theater thinking badly of Catholics, either the religion, the people or the clergy.

So no, the Dan Brown inspired movies don’t go in that list.

As to your film expertise…here’s a trivia question for you:

Here’s a pop quiz: What famous scene does Francis Ford Coppola ( “The Godfather,”) Woody Allen ( “Bananas,” ) Zucker (Naked Gun 33 1/3," ) Peter Sellers (The Magic Christian," ) and George Lucas (“Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith”) all pay homage to in the movies just listed–and did that scene actually take place?

C’mon, you film snob you, this should be a snap. Easy as pushing a baby carriage.

 

[Louie1983]

I’m not going to argue about the persecution that Catholics have historically received, because you have.

HOWEVER…from about the time of Constantine (d.337 AD) until the time of Henry the 8th,(separation from Rome 1533) --about 1200 years, the Catholics were not so much the persecuted as the persecutors…and you guys were very, very good at it. You did not suffer dissension, heretics, pagans or anybody else of a different religious opinion. what you guys did to the Jews…whew.

…Even after Henry did his smash and grab with church property, the Catholics got a good lick or two in…“Bloody Mary” was not called that because she liked tomato juice in her vodka, but because upon gaining the throne of England, she proceeded to merrily burn hundreds of 'heretics" (Protestants…) at the stake. Elizabeth stopped that.

Yes, the Catholics have suffered persecution since then, but not in any place where they are the majority. What you guys did to South America–goodness. Where you are in the minority, yep, you get it. You get it HARD.

…and the Catholics who are being persecuted absolutely do not deserve it. I have to sit back and wonder, though…I wonder if that which you feel coming around is the harvest of what went around? Unfair as the idea is, it’s worth a thought.

After all, that’s the logic being used when Catholics (and others) justify the sort of stuff that was done to the Mormons…

I think whoever is the minority in any country, city etc get it hard, and no-one ever deserves it!. I’m not denying that the church has been responsible for violence in the past but that just proves that there are sinners in the church, even popes may have been involved in some of these but jesus never said their actions would be infallible, just their teachings on the faith.

*“I wonder if that which you feel coming around is the harvest of what went around? Unfair as the idea is, it’s worth a thought”, *

Hmmm, i don’t think so but it is an interesting thought. Given all the bad stuff the church has been apart of i think the good the church has done (fighting poverty, fighting communism, the saints it’s produced and all the good people it has) greately outweighs the negative stuff not only in essence but in the actual number of situations the church has done good as opposed to bad.

 

[dianaiad]

All I can say is: wow.

That’s what I thought when I read your words outright claiming that the persecution of the Mormons (you know, tar and feathering, murder, arson, theft, beatings, stuff like that…) “pales in comparison” to someone using words and saying…not that Catholics were horrible people or deserved to be killed or “c’mon, guys, let’s get a couple hundred of us and go burn us some Catlicks…” but “their creeds are an abomination”

Wow.

You have a very skewed view of what persecution actually is, I believe. I know what it is.

when someone (like you…) tells me that the man I consider to be a prophet was a scam artist, a thief and a traitor, I’m not supposed to look at THAT as persecution. (actually, I don’t look at it as that. Discourtesy, yes, but not persecution.)

However, I am supposed to view someone referring to a creed that you believe in as an ‘abomination’ as being more completely horrific a bit of persecution than Haun’s Mill, where a minister’s son shot the brains out of a nine year old because 'nits make lice." Why, having the state militia invade homes, kidnap men and confiscate firearms and food is persecution…but it ‘pales in comparison’ to someone telling you that your 'ministers are corrupt?"

EXCUSE ME???

REbecca, get a grip, girl. Even if we accept the above words as the sort of persecution against which murder and mayhem pale, we have another problem; that was written close to two centuries ago…and you are now telling me that if a movie celebrating Catholicism is over ten years old, it doesn’t count.

I have to admit, this is a double standard against with all others must be measured.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Diana, all I see is you trying to redirect the thread away from the subject. Diversions. I’m not interested in your anti-Catholic rhetoric that has been encapsulated into a Mormon persecution complex. I’m not even sure how you are able to do this.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I’m not going to argue about the persecution that Catholics have historically received, because you have.

HOWEVER…from about the time of Constantine (d.337 AD) until the time of Henry the 8th,(separation from Rome 1533) --about 1200 years, the Catholics were not so much the persecuted as the persecutors…and you guys were very, very good at it. You did not suffer dissension, heretics, pagans or anybody else of a different religious opinion. what you guys did to the Jews…whew.

…Even after Henry did his smash and grab with church property, the Catholics got a good lick or two in…“Bloody Mary” was not called that because she liked tomato juice in her vodka, but because upon gaining the throne of England, she proceeded to merrily burn hundreds of 'heretics" (Protestants…) at the stake. Elizabeth stopped that.

About 300. Some of them are on record as regarding one another as heretics. Elizabeth I did her thing over the span of 44 years, not three, like her half-sister. If Mary I had reigned longer, the effect that all those burnings make on the imagination would be less.​

Yes, the Catholics have suffered persecution since then, but not in any place where they are the majority. What you guys did to South America–goodness. Where you are in the minority, yep, you get it. You get it HARD.

…and the Catholics who are being persecuted absolutely do not deserve it. I have to sit back and wonder, though…I wonder if that which you feel coming around is the harvest of what went around? Unfair as the idea is, it’s worth a thought.

After all, that’s the logic being used when Catholics (and others) justify the sort of stuff that was done to the Mormons…

Where are Catholics persecuted ? I’m so sick of the Catholic League raising Cain over every tiniest thing that doesn’t actively favour the CC, & calling it persecution, that all these cries of “The CC is persecuted !” have ceased to be credible. I’ll tell you what persecution is - persecution is being force-fed excrement, as members of the Falun Gong are; there is room for doubt that US Catholics are force-fed excrement, or are crucified (as one Christian boy was - amazingly, he survived to tell the tale) or are hanged for being Christians (as happened in (IIRC) Iran). When Catholic Churches in the US are burned down, nuns raped, bishops kidnapped & murdered, then it will be time to complain of persecution; as things stand, not only does the US not persecute the CC; it even receives Papal diplomats, & sends its own to the Vatican (BTW, getting what it deseves for treating the laity like sex-fodder is not persecution, but long-overdue punishment). And Catholics in the US have full liberty to broadcast, educate, catechise, nurse, teach; I wish we in the UK were “persecuted” like that: if only ! They’re not persecuted - they’re pampered. There’s not a Catholic Church in Europe that wouldn’t give its eye-teeth to be as well off. I wish the Church in Scotland had ten per cent as many converts as in the US. ​

 

[dianaiad]

I think whoever is the minority in any country, city etc get it hard, and no-one ever deserves it!. I’m not denying that the church has been responsible for violence in the past but that just proves that there are sinners in the church, even popes may have been involved in some of these but jesus never said their actions would be infallible, just their teachings on the faith.

*“I wonder if that which you feel coming around is the harvest of what went around? Unfair as the idea is, it’s worth a thought”, *

Hmmm, i don’t think so but it is an interesting thought. Given all the bad stuff the church has been apart of i think the good the church has done (fighting poverty, fighting communism, the saints it’s produced and all the good people it has) greately outweighs the negative stuff not only in essence but in the actual number of situations the church has done good as opposed to bad.

Surprisingly enough, I agree. Mostly.

The problem, of course, is that most of the really inventive forms of persecution and torture were either inherited by, or used first by the Catholics. I wish that were not true, but it is. More Catholics burned suspected witches than Protestants did (Protestants mostly hanged them…and even then the numbers don’t match.) The sheer numbers of deaths,.even after five hundred years or so, still are heavily against Catholic hands.

It’s going to take a few years before everybody else (well, everybody religious, anyway) catches up.

Oh, they WILL catch up, no problem. People can be very, very nasty.

The thing I WILL say is this: unlike the rest of the world, Catholics have actually gotten better at the ‘love the world’ thing. I mean…I wouldn’t have wanted to be a Mormon in 1400. I wouldn’t have made it for two days unjailed, untortured and alive. Now? I just get told that I’m a dirty cultist who believes in a fraud, a conman, that I’m not a Christian and am going to hell.

That’s quite an improvement, actually.

 

[dianaiad]

Diana, all I see is you trying to redirect the thread away from the subject. Diversions. I’m not interested in your anti-Catholic rhetoric that has been encapsulated into a Mormon persecution complex. I’m not even sure how you are able to do this.

I simply posted a list of movies to show Jerusha that her claim is erroneous; that there are indeed plenty of pro-Catholic movies out there, and have been all along. You are the one who misread it, presenting it somehow as a list of “not anti-Catholic” independent and special interest films.

So I’m not the one hijacking the thread. If anything, that would be you…and you are making some very wild claims here that you have been called on.

First…you call a list of major moneymaking and Oscar winning movies a 'cherrypicked" (by ME, no less) list of ‘not anti-Catholic’ movies–intimating that nobody has seen them, and nobody knows what they are. Shoot, outright WROTE that you didn’t think anything older than ten years counted…

Yet you claim to be a 'film snob…" and are not aware of movies like “Becket,” and think that “The Ten Commandments,” “Ben Hur,” “A Man for All Seasons” “Lillies of the Field” and “Going My Way” were Indy films that nobody but Catholics ever saw?

I correct you several times…telling you that this list is a Catholic list of major motion pictures that present Catholicism directly in a positive an uplifting manner…and you keep claiming that I’m somehow insulting your faith by listing the movies. Did you even go to the site where I found them?

As well, claiming that the persecutions suffered by the Mormons “pales in comparison” to WORDS said or written by anybody—no matter how insulting you consider those words to be–that’s incredible. And that’s not ME having a persecution complex. Anybody who would say that murder ‘pales in comparison’ to words in a book definitely has a ‘persecution complex.’ and needs a reality check.

Now the reports of the Nativist riots…THAT is persecution by any description,but that Cambellite book? Not so much. “AntiCatholic?” you betcha. Persecution? Not unless a Catholic got beat over the head by one, or unless the reasoning in it was used to directly justify murder and the sort of thing that the Nativists did, the way “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” was used to justify mistreating the Jews.

As far as I am aware, history doesn’t mention that the Campbellites ever did that sort of thing. I could very well be wrong about that, but Jerusha, I think, would have mentioned actions taken rather than words written if there was something there. If you can show me where the Campbellites actually went around burning down Catholic churches, tarring and feathering Catholic priests and murdering Catholics in their beds, I’ll certainly agree that there was real persecution going on in the Campbellite movement.

As to hijacking the thread—sorry, but…I didn’t. I simply tried to show Jerusha that her claim of continuing and modern day persecution in the film industry was a little, well, off.

I will admit to some bemusement at your reaction. What in the world did you think that list was? And how in the world could someone claiming expertise in film history (a self proclaimed ‘film snob’) dismiss it as a list of independent films made by Catholics for Catholics? That’s a little like a self proclaimed baseball expert not knowing who Babe Ruth was, or a self proclaimed Olympics history buff not knowing who Jim Thorpe was.

By the way, did you figure out what scene I was referring to? I gave you a hint broad enough to march soldiers down.

 

[dianaiad]

About 300. Some of them are on record as regarding one another as heretics. Elizabeth I did her thing over the span of 44 years, not three, like her half-sister. If Mary I had reigned longer, the effect that all those burnings make on the imagination would be less.​

If Mary had reigned longer, England would be speaking French–or Spanish. She was not the brightest of lightbulbs…and as she got older, she got nastier. Had she lived, and kept her crown, pretty much everybody agrees that the burnings would have escalated.

Where are Catholics persecuted ? I’m so sick of the Catholic League raising Cain over every tiniest thing that doesn’t actively favour the CC, & calling it persecution, that all these cries of “The CC is persecuted !” have ceased to be credible. I’ll tell you what persecution is - persecution is being force-fed excrement, as members of the Falun Gong are; there is room for doubt that US Catholics are force-fed excrement, or are crucified (as one Christian boy was - amazingly, he survived to tell the tale) or are hanged for being Christians (as happened in (IIRC) Iran). When Catholic Churches in the US are burned down, nuns raped, bishops kidnapped & murdered, then it will be time to complain of persecution; as things stand, not only does the US not persecute the CC; it even receives Papal diplomats, & sends its own to the Vatican (BTW, getting what it deseves for treating the laity like sex-fodder is not persecution, but long-overdue punishment). And Catholics in the US have full liberty to broadcast, educate, catechise, nurse, teach; I wish we in the UK were “persecuted” like that: if only ! They’re not persecuted - they’re pampered. There’s not a Catholic Church in Europe that wouldn’t give its eye-teeth to be as well off. I wish the Church in Scotland had ten per cent as many converts as in the US. ​

Well, yeah, the Catholic church in the US is taken care of. It’s taken awhile to shake everything down, but pretty much all religions in the US are ‘pampered,’ so to speak.

Unless, of course, they really DO want to test the limits of the ‘freedom of religion’ thing and want to live in communes, or have more than one spouse, or live a different lifestyle with a different level of technology—or are just what their neighbors would call 'weird."

Catholics don’t actually fall into that category.

 

[kalt]

“After all, my BA is only in English with a minor in Communications (film history), my MA is in English,.”

Am I the only one who thinks it’s bad debate form to make claims like the one above.

It’s debating the (supposed) relative merits of the debaters instead of the arguments made. Is that good debate form?

There are plenty of degree-holding idiots, so how is the above claim a good debate argument. Look at what a few “experts” (MBA-holding idiots) have done to the housing market! A degree is no guarantee of intelligence or usable knowledge.

" I"ve only been working in the community theater and film industry for 35 years"

A similar appeal. Of course this could mean that you’ve been selling popcorn and ushering people to their seats for most of your life.

Are we supposed to accept these claims as proof that your previous debate points are correct? :bowdown:

Maybe I’m jaded, but as soon as I see these claims, I think they’re either exaggerated or false. I figure that really smart people don’t go around telling people why they should accept their pov.

Your claims may be true–you may have a degree–and they might not be exaggerated–maybe you produce films or direct plays, but there is no way that anyone reading those claims here can verifiy those claims, so making them here is useless.

Actually, it’s worse than useless. I think that making claims like this, the person seems to be weak. The person isn’t able to express himself well-enough that other people accept his pov or debate point, so he appeals to his credentials. IMO, if the debate point were that strong, it would stand on it’s own.

The credentials of the person making the points are irrelevant. You can try to pretty-up (really prop up) debate points by claiming that you have authority (a degree-holding debater), but debate points stand or fall on their own merits.

As far as the movies debate, specifically, I think there are plenty of movies that are friendly to the CC, and there are plenty that are unfriendly.

Was there a better Catholic Character in film than Sr Bertrille?

Oh, I do have to mention “It’s a Wonderful Life”. A great movie ruined by one whining line that goes something like this. “Everytime you hear a bell, an angel gets his wings.” It’s like nails on a chalkboard.

 

[kalt]

Surprisingly enough, I agree. Mostly.

The problem, of course, is that most of the really inventive forms of persecution and torture were either inherited by, or used first by the Catholics. I wish that were not true, but it is. More Catholics burned suspected witches than Protestants did (Protestants mostly hanged them…and even then the numbers don’t match.) The sheer numbers of deaths,.even after five hundred years or so, still are heavily against Catholic hands.

 

[Jerusha]

Thank you, Diana, for keeping this very academic thread alive. More people will read from the link I posted, and become wise to the apostasy of “restorationists.”

You appear to have a learning disability in reading comprehension, perhaps you should consult with the school psychologist who serves your classroom. Otherwise, perhaps your conscious intent was to derail the thread. I never claimed that the movie industry portrays the Catholic Church negatively, although I have seen some movies and trailers that are profoundly anti-Catholic.

My point, as Rebecca said, is that Mormonism originated with the restorationist movement, which is profoundly anti-Catholic. So anti-Catholic that the originator of the restorationist movement invited Bishop Purcell to refute his drivel. And, Campbell was soundly refuted. Now, if you refuse to read the debate, that is your own choice. Campbell did make some good points. Purcell refuted every one of the arguments your presented on this thread, and people here are using his counter-arguments. You are doing yourself a disservice by refusing to read it.

As for the LDS religion being profoundly different from other religions that originated from the restorationists, of course it would be. After all, once a Christian rejects the wisdom accumulated by 2000 years of Catholicism, his beliefs can go in almost any direction.

G of G, your point was well taken. When my mother married a Catholic, and converted, her father’s family (Brit) was supportive, her mother’s family (Native/New Amsterdam Dutch) was opposed. I don’t know what the dynamics were in this very individual situation.