Why do Catholics play the role of victim so much?

[kalt]

For your good reading.

It works both ways.

That’s an “interesting” site, but as I said, I don’t know anyne who thinks that Protestants aren’t Christians. Read the CCC to get the official teaching on the subject.

Just because religion ‘A’ believes that the adherants religion ‘B’ are damned for following religion ‘B’, it does not necessarily believe that religion ‘A’ hates religion ‘B’.

All that I know is the faith of religion ‘A’ is not an inclusive faith and whatever requirements religion ‘A’ has for avoiding damnation are mutually exclusive (in the eyes of religion ‘A’) of religion ‘B’.

Otherwise all religions that are not inclusive faiths can logically be accused of preaching hatred against those faiths that these religions exclude. That makes absolutely no sense.

What you’ve written is a little muddled. Are you saying that the Catholic Church teaches that anyone who isn’t a Catholic is damned?

 

[kalt]

Thank-you for the example. But I thought we were talking about theological points.

Some people don’t want to hear anything that upsets their previosly conceived notions. This is especially true of strongly held beliefs–whether it’s abortion or the Catholic Church, if someone believes something ,there is no number of facts that will change their mind.

Someone who believes X about abortion is likely to believe it forever, if X supports their pov. And they’ll believe X about the CC, regardless of how much proof there is that X is incorrect.

Human nature.

But since we, I thought, were talking about theological issues, do you have an example of when Catholics should have conceded a point?

kalt:

“You say that no one has ever conceded a point,” you say. “Can you name a point made here that you think Catholics should have conceded? And can you provide the reason Catholics were wrong for not conceding? (other than that you disagree)”

On another thread I documented the fact that abortion and breast cancer are not linked. Research being offered here was a decade old. I updated the information. Not only did no one find it interesting or a relief (as some of you may have friends or family members who have had an abortion), but I was jumped on like a gnu in a pack of hyenas.

Any time I have offered a neutral source, such as the CDC, it still is unacceptable to the Catholics who have read the post, because it’s easier for them to believe in the consequence of damnation than it is to receive or acknowledge that science has changed its mind.

marietta

 

[kalt]

I did a brief search on TIA, the supposed Catholic group you quoted. This group is not in line w/ Catholicism. In fact, that are down right crude when talking about the pope.

Here is what one had to say about TIA. If these facts aren’t true, and you have proof otherwise, can you post the link?

"TRADITION IN ACTION
Los Angeles, Calif.
Tradition in Action was formed in 1995 by Marian Horvat and is dedicated to creating “counter-revolutionaries” – people willing to fight changes in the church, starting at the time of the French Revolution, that were supposedly wrought by Masons, Jews, and “other seminal secret forces.” Horvat was joined in 1996 by a Brazilian church scholar named Atila Sinke Guimarães, who like Horvat was a former leader in the far-right Catholic anti-abortion group, the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property, which threw them out in 1998. Tradition in Action is particularly angry with the late Pope John Paul II, arguing that before him the Catholic Church “was vigilant for 2,000 years against the enmity of the synagogue.” Horvat helped Guimarães launch the 1997 English edition of his In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, an attack on the Vatican II reforms. Guimarães moved to the United States to join Horvat in 1999, and has been here ever since. Guimarães has also been writing for John Vennari’s Catholic Family News since 1998, and for Michael Matt’s The Remnant since 1999. Guimarães, Vennari, Matt and Horvat collaborated in the 2000 anti-Vatican book We Resist You to the Face, in which the four authors “respectfully suspend obedience to the Pope” and declare themselves in a “state of resistance” to the Vatican II reforms. The book also condemns John Paul II for accepting gun control and the United Nations, and even for allowing pop singer Bob Dylan to perform for him. Tradition in Action goes further than that, however. On its Web site, it cites approvingly church actions against Jews over the centuries, listing a series of religious edicts condemning Jews for usury and blasphemy, and banning marriage between Catholics and Jews. In the same vein, the site approvingly quotes the infamous 1492 edict of Ferdinand and Isabella, the Catholic monarchs of Spain, that expelled from the country all Jews who declined to convert to Christianity. "

If this group also says that Protestants aren’t Christians, we know that we can throw that out as the rantings of a bunch of psuedo-Catholic nutcases.

For your good reading.

It works both ways.

Just because religion ‘A’ believes that the adherants religion ‘B’ are damned for following religion ‘B’, it does not necessarily believe that religion ‘A’ hates religion ‘B’.

All that I know is the faith of religion ‘A’ is not an inclusive faith and whatever requirements religion ‘A’ has for avoiding damnation are mutually exclusive (in the eyes of religion ‘A’) of religion ‘B’.

Otherwise all religions that are not inclusive faiths can logically be accused of preaching hatred against those faiths that these religions exclude. That makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

From Kalt

You say that no one has ever conceded a point," you say. “Can you name a point made here that you think Catholics should have conceded? And can you provide the reason Catholics were wrong for not conceding? (other than that you disagree)”

From Marietta:

On another thread I documented the fact that abortion and breast cancer are not linked. With respect, Marietta, as somebody in the medical field myself, there are studies that state that abortion and breast cancer are not linked and there are studies that say that they are, and there are studies that say that the evidence is inconclusive.Research being offered here was a decade old. I updated the information. Not only did no one find it interesting or a relief (as some of you may have friends or family members who have had an abortion), but I was jumped on like a gnu in a pack of hyenas.I’m sorry you feel jumped on. It is a difficult and ‘scary’ topic for most women. But again, you and I both know that ‘studies’ have come out over far longer periods of time than a decade, that have categorically stated “X is good” at one point, and then, at another point, "X is bad’. I remember the studies that PROVED that eggs were TERRIBLE (cholesterol). Coffee: Ditto. Just recently we had a study that proved how beneficial drinking coffee can be. And a few years ago eggs quietly came off the ‘forbidden list’. 30 years ago, we were told, in nursing class, that autistic children were that way because of ‘cold’ mothers. 40 years ago, homosexual behavior was categorized as a disorder in the DM-III. So, ‘facts’ may not be as ‘factual’ as we think. Breast cancer study is ongoing and there are many new discoveries even now.

Any time I have offered a neutral source, such as the CDC Medical/governmental does not equal neutral, necessarily. The CDC most definitely has a ‘secular’ worldview, a ‘pragmatist’ worldview, and that worldview may be ‘flawed’ when it contradicts the religious worldview. For an individual or group who accept only the ‘consequences’ of an action without addressing whether it’s root is moral and the treatment of the root cause rather than the ‘effects’, dealing in questionable moral practices can seem perfectly justifiable, even good. Thus, abortion may be seen as an acceptable ‘action’ on a ‘case by case’ basis., it still is unacceptable to the Catholics who have read the post, because it’s easier for them to believe in the consequence of damnation than it is to receive or acknowledge that science has changed its mind. This part of your post is kind of a strawman. You are putting ‘words’ into the mouths of Catholics and then judging them on the words which you–not they–spoke. Perhaps you could consider that those who do not leap to accept your ‘facts’ from the CDC do so not because of ‘damnation mode’ but because they–having closely examined those facts–have reasoned that they may not be as accurate as you think?

marietta

So you see, people may not be rejecting YOU personally, but (using their reason and exploring the subject) they can disagree with the evidence you give, which may indeed be ‘accurate’ to the degree ‘science’ understands it today, but not all-inclusive, or may indeed only appear accurate until other data alter the picture.

 

[ufamtobie]

If you really are the one true church that Christ founded, then why do you give a hoot what anyone else thinks of you? It amazes me the extent some of you will go to play the victim’s role.

SIA,

You say Victims?

I say more like presecuted by the likes of people like yourself, the Catholic Church is as you say victimized. If you want to call The Lords Church VICTIMS then I guess we are victims of your presecution. The Lord prophesied that his Church would be Presecuted.

Sia, So go on and fulfill Our Lords Prophesy in presecuting His Church. However I sure hate to be in your shoes.

Ufamtobie

 

[marietta]

Tantum ergo:

Science is junk. All Catholics are reasonable. I am going to Hell.

What a relief that will be.

marietta

 

[LilyM]

Tantum ergo:

Science is junk. All Catholics are reasonable. I am going to Hell.

What a relief that will be.

marietta

Science isn’t junk in the slightest, but it certainly isn’t infallible. Even the theories of evolution and relativity, for example, will never be more than just that - theories. Science itself recognises that its explanations of how the universe works are incredibly susceptible of revision and updating.

 

[Singinbeauty]

SinginBeauty

On your signature:

To all who prayed, my guy came back from Iraq 06/04/2008 and after 14 months he is still in one piece! Thank you LORD!!!

Thank you SO MUCH everyone! It is good to have in one piece and back on this side of the world again. Please keep him in your prayers as he as a LOT to deal with and a LOT of memories to sort through that no one should have to experience. He needs to see someone but at the moment prefers the alcohol… *sigh…

Sorry! Back on topic now!!!

 

[zaffiroborant]

Thank you SO MUCH everyone! It is good to have in one piece and back on this side of the world again. Please keep him in your prayers as he as a LOT to deal with and a LOT of memories to sort through that no one should have to experience. He needs to see someone but at the moment prefers the alcohol… *sigh…

Sorry! Back on topic now!!!

I will continue to pray for you both, it’s a tough road for you and your husband. And it is not the kind of thing that is resolved in a couple of months and then you move on. But I can’t begin to express how happy I am for you both for his safety.

 

[kalt]

Science isn’t junk in the slightest, but it certainly isn’t infallible. Even the theories of evolution and relativity, for example, will never be more than just that - theories. Science itself recognises that its explanations of how the universe works are incredibly susceptible of revision and updating.

I hear a lot of Catholics talking like this.

You have to get a good definition of “theory”. In science, “theory” doesn’t mean merely “guess” or “idea”.

It’s a mystery to me why so many Catholics have a problem with evolution. Catholicism and evolution fact aren’t at odds.

 

[mozart-250]

I did a brief search on TIA, the supposed Catholic group you quoted. This group is not in line w/ Catholicism. In fact, that are down right crude when talking about the pope.

Well I found the web site by those who posted here.

So a couple of questions on this group. Are they sedevacantist? Are they some other religion other than Catholic? Have its leaders been excommunicated? Has anyone that is a leader (Cardinal or Pope) condemned this group?

Or is this the opinion of one Catholic versus the opinions of other Catholic?

From my point of view from watching these threads, the state of Protestants is a debated issue within Catholicism with both sides citing the Magisterium to support their position. I have learned some of the right questions to ask, but this issue still seems to me as one where Catholics disagree with Catholics over what their own Magisterium teaches.

Hey I have no doubt they are not “mainstream” Catholics. I have no doubt they represent a minority voice within Catholicism. But, unless I have evidence to the contrary, they do seem to be Catholic.

At any rate, I am not going to claim that the “Tradition in Action” folks (be they Catholic or something else) “hate” Protestants and “persecute” Protestants. I will leave those words to the gay rights groups to abuse when they speak about Christians.

 

[mozart-250]

SIA,

You say Victims?

I say more like presecuted by the likes of people like yourself, the Catholic Church is as you say victimized. If you want to call The Lords Church VICTIMS then I guess we are victims of your presecution. The Lord prophesied that his Church would be Presecuted.

Sia, So go on and fulfill Our Lords Prophesy in presecuting His Church. However I sure hate to be in your shoes.

Ufamtobie

Persecuted?

By an anonomous poster over the internet? :bigyikes:

Persecution is somebody in a position of power denying a group out of power basic human rights because of their faith.

Move to Saudi Arabia, Iraq, or China and you might understand what persecution is.

Persecution is not an anonomous poster over the internet saying nasty things about you and your faith. From my following these forums I have seen both Catholics and Protestants get banned by the moderators for saying nasty things over the internet about the other. However, none of these posters are “persecuting” the other side.

Besides, SIA has been here over six months and has 400 posts or so. I assume that the moderators do not think SIA is that much of a bad citizen here.

This post is exhibit “A” in “playing the victim” around here. Sheesh. Get over it.

 

[LDNCatholic]

This post is exhibit “A” in “playing the victim” around here. Sheesh. Get over it.

That is just one person and is not representative of all Catholics, or even all CAF members. Some Catholics have a legitimate reason to feel persecuted.

Everybody likes to play the victim, countless threads on the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the Reformation, most by Protestants of some type or another. All blaming us naughty naughty Catholics with flawed logic and false evidence. The only reason there are more ‘Catholic victims’ here, is because this is a Catholic forum, there are more Catholics.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Persecuted?

By an anonomous poster over the internet? :bigyikes:

Persecution is somebody in a position of power denying a group out of power basic human rights because of their faith.

Move to Saudi Arabia, Iraq, or China and you might understand what persecution is.

Persecution is not an anonomous poster over the internet saying nasty things about you and your faith. From my following these forums I have seen both Catholics and Protestants get banned by the moderators for saying nasty things over the internet about the other. However, none of these posters are “persecuting” the other side.

Besides, SIA has been here over six months and has 400 posts or so. I assume that the moderators do not think SIA is that much of a bad citizen here.

This post is exhibit “A” in “playing the victim” around here. Sheesh. Get over it.

No sir. there are different ways of persecution.
for example: being lied about, name callings, etc…bigotry against catholics by many. if you cant see, you are in denial.

Chesterton
** "The Catholic faith even when watered down can still boil the world to rags. " **

 

[mangy_dog]

If you really are the one true church that Christ founded, then why do you give a hoot what anyone else thinks of you? It amazes me the extent some of you will go to play the victim’s role.

You ask a question and then you disappear.

Be that as it may.

You are correct, the Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first Pope - 263 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.

And to an extent, we don’t give a hoot what people think of us inasmuch as the aforementioned statment is true…

However, we do care.

We care about other christians and what they think and believe because separate from the “vine” the branches die. And we do care.

The Immaculate, Perpetual Virgin, Mother of God and the Catholic church have a common vocation - Divine Maternity.

Now quit whining and come on home.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[mozart-250]

No sir. there are different ways of persecution.
for example: being lied about, name callings, etc…bigotry against catholics by many. if you cant see, you are in denial.

Chesterton
** "The Catholic faith even when watered down can still boil the world to rags. " **

Now the post I was referring to specifically charged SIA with “persecuting” Catholics.

So let’s take this reasoning to its logical conclustion.

SIA seems to be a good citizen here. He has a post count of 400 and about 6-7 months service time.

I take it to the extent that he is “persecuting” Catholics, he has not done it to the extent to get banned by the moderators.

Meanwhile, I have observed several posters who have gotten banned both Catholic and Protestant. Simple logic suggests that if SIA is “persecuting” Catholics, then the posters (both Catholic and Protestant) who have gotten banned by the moderators are much more guilty of “persecuting” the others.

Since both Catholics and Protestants have gotten banned, may I suggest that under your criteria for “persecution” (using the neutral metric of “banned posters”), that Catholics are just as guilty as “persecuting” Protestants as Protestants are of “persecuting” Catholics.

Therefore, it is a double standard to whine about alleged persecution over the internet by Protestants when (according to neutral metrics) Catholics do the same thing.

Of course, I consider it the epitome of silliness and playing the role of victim to whine about any of this silly internet banter as “persecuting” each other. Go to Iraq and you will see real persecution of Christians by terrorist organizations.

But if you want to define persecution in this manner, fine. I insist, however, that you be consistent in your definition here and acknowledge that Catholics also “persecute” Protestants.

 

[kalt]

There is no doubt about how the CC view other Christian churches. To say that the CC doesn’t consider other Christians Christian takes a whole lotta convoluted thinking, denial, and, most likely, a less-than-charitible motive.

From the CCC

"Toward unity

820 "Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time."277 Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: "That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me."278 The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.279

821 Certain things are required in order to respond adequately to this call:

• a permanent renewal of the Church in greater fidelity to her vocation; such renewal is the driving-force of the movement toward unity;280
• conversion of heart as the faithful “try to live holier lives according to the Gospel”;281 for it is the unfaithfulness of the members to Christ’s gift which causes divisions;
• prayer in common, because “change of heart and holiness of life, along with public and private prayer for the unity of Christians, should be regarded as the soul of the whole ecumenical movement, and merits the name 'spiritual ecumenism;”'282
• fraternal knowledge of each other;283
• ecumenical formation of the faithful and especially of priests;284
• dialogue among theologians and meetings among Christians of the different churches and communities;285
• collaboration among Christians in various areas of service to mankind.286 “Human service” is the idiomatic phrase.

Well I found the web site by those who posted here.

So a couple of questions on this group. Are they sedevacantist? Are they some other religion other than Catholic? Have its leaders been excommunicated? Has anyone that is a leader (Cardinal or Pope) condemned this group?

Or is this the opinion of one Catholic versus the opinions of other Catholic?

From my point of view from watching these threads, the state of Protestants is a debated issue within Catholicism with both sides citing the Magisterium to support their position. I have learned some of the right questions to ask, but this issue still seems to me as one where Catholics disagree with Catholics over what their own Magisterium teaches.

Hey I have no doubt they are not “mainstream” Catholics. I have no doubt they represent a minority voice within Catholicism. But, unless I have evidence to the contrary, they do seem to be Catholic.

At any rate, I am not going to claim that the “Tradition in Action” folks (be they Catholic or something else) “hate” Protestants and “persecute” Protestants. I will leave those words to the gay rights groups to abuse when they speak about Christians.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Now the post I was referring to specifically charged SIA with “persecuting” Catholics.

So let’s take this reasoning to its logical conclustion.

SIA seems to be a good citizen here. He has a post count of 400 and about 6-7 months service time.

I take it to the extent that he is “persecuting” Catholics, he has not done it to the extent to get banned by the moderators.

Meanwhile, I have observed several posters who have gotten banned both Catholic and Protestant. Simple logic suggests that if SIA is “persecuting” Catholics, then the posters (both Catholic and Protestant) who have gotten banned by the moderators are much more guilty of “persecuting” the others.

Since both Catholics and Protestants have gotten banned, may I suggest that under your criteria for “persecution” (using the neutral metric of “banned posters”), that Catholics are just as guilty as “persecuting” Protestants as Protestants are of “persecuting” Catholics.

Therefore, it is a double standard to whine about alleged persecution over the internet by Protestants when (according to neutral metrics) Catholics do the same thing.

Of course, I consider it the epitome of silliness and playing the role of victim to whine about any of this silly internet banter as “persecuting” each other. Go to Iraq and you will see real persecution of Christians by terrorist organizations.

But if you want to define persecution in this manner, fine. I insist, however, that you be consistent in your definition here and acknowledge that Catholics also “persecute” Protestants.

you may not understand what i am refering to as persecution.
i am not talking about people here being rude to each other. i am talking about real persecution.
i never heard a priest saying nothing against any protestant or other religious people. but i have heard pastors and other clergy and people calling the CC many things but good. i saw them making funny of catholics during their services and etc…

 

[mozart-250]

There is no doubt about how the CC view other Christian churches. To say that the CC doesn’t consider other Christians Christian takes a whole lotta convoluted thinking, denial, and, most likely, a less-than-charitible motive.

It is no doubt to you…and to be honest it is no doubt to me.

But from what I have read here there is quite a bit of doubt and debate amongst Catholics. And those who disagree will cite previous quotes of your Magisterium to substantiate their perspective.

Anyway, I have sort of lost track on how this relates to the thread.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Tantum ergo:

Science is junk. All Catholics are reasonable. I am going to Hell.

What a relief that will be.

marietta

Marietta: I’m just letting you know that I read your post. I am sorry that you appear not to have understood what I wrote, and that instead you post such a bitter couple of sentences. The only person who said “Science is junk, all Catholics are reasonable” is you. No one condemns you to Hell though you write that phrase as though others have done so.

If you truly wish to engage in discussion with people, instead of carrying on conversations with yourself, you are more than welcome here.