RomeOPhobic

[jkaands]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1031508' date='Jul 26 2006, 05:54 PM']
Why do Cathos gloss over the 'bad' Popes, Bishops, and Priests and allow them human foibles, but everything that Luther had to say is discounted?
[/quote]

Amen, Anomaly.

good show!

[jkaands]

[quote name='desertwoman' post='1031866' date='Jul 27 2006, 07:47 AM']
As a protestant, it was from reading jack chick tracks and other things from people who had an agenda against the Catholic Church.

My father has a probelm with the veneration of Mary, and I still have problems with this as well for we believe that only Jesus is to be lifted up and no one else.

re veneration of Mary: Hear, hear, desertwoman!

What are "jack chick tracks"?

True, the Anglicans persecuted. As a matter of fact, in this country, the group in power persecuted the group that wasn't, just like Europe--any everywhere else! That's why the Founding Fathers were so concerned about protecting ALL religious rights in the Constitution.
[/quote]

[LSW]

No one has ever "glossed" over the bad Popes, Priests, ect. I have, and many other Catholics on this forum, have admitted that some in the Church have committed grave sins in the past against others. In fact I stay away from using this ridiculous argument against Protestants because its counter productive and it cuts both ways. Protestants love to argue like this because they think this is a good reason not to be Catholic. Well if that's the case then I won't ever be Protestant because of all the bad stuff that some Protestants have done in the past to Catholics and others. See how dumb this is?

Futhermore, Pope john Paul II has apologized many times during his Pontificate on behalf of members of the Church that have acted less than Christian in the past against others. I'm still waiting for a Minister, Rabbi, Imam to step up to the plate and do the same.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1031508' date='Jul 26 2006, 07:54 PM']
Why do Cathos gloss over the 'bad' Popes, Bishops, and Priests and allow them human foibles, but everything that Luther had to say is discounted?
[/quote]
There have indeed been bad Popes, Bishops, and Priests. John Paul II made many apologies over acts of Christians in the past. Not [i]everything[/i] Luther had to say was incorrect. Some of his criticism of corruption resulted in Catholic reforms during the Counter-Reformation.
The problems with some Catholic clergy are behavioral. The Church's problems with Luther were doctrinal.

[quote name='jkaands' post='1031185' date='Jul 26 2006, 11:15 AM']
Protestests don't worship their founders and reformers.
[/quote]
I think you misunderstand, the Church does not worship saints.

Edited July 27, 2006 by thedude

[thessalonian]

Read books such as Foxes Book of Marytrs sometime. They liberally throw around words such as papists, popish, romanists, romish, etc. Clear prejudice.

[Era Might]

We also throw around terms like "Fundy" and "Deformation". It runs both ways.

[quote]Consequently, the commitment to ecumenism must be based upon the conversion of hearts and upon prayer, which will also lead to the necessary purification of past memories. With the grace of the Holy Spirit, the Lord's disciples, inspired by love, by the power of the truth and by a sincere desire for mutual forgiveness and reconciliation, are called to re-examine together their painful past and the hurt which that past regrettably continues to provoke even today. All together, they are invited by the ever fresh power of the Gospel to acknowledge with sincere and total objectivity the mistakes made and the contingent factors at work at the origins of their deplorable divisions. What is needed is a calm, clear-sighted and truthful vision of things, a vision enlivened by divine mercy and capable of freeing people's minds and of inspiring in everyone a renewed willingness, precisely with a view to proclaiming the Gospel to the men and women of every people and nation.

--Pope John Paul II, Encyclical Letter "Ut Unum Sint"[/quote]

[Anomaly]

[quote name='thedude' post='1032077' date='Jul 27 2006, 01:06 PM']
The problems with some Catholic clergy are behavioral. The Church's problems with Luther were doctrinal.[/quote]Not all of Luther's points were Doctrinally wrong. What about selling indulgences? What about not disciplining corrupt bishops? You admit that Luther was right in many instances and led to needed reforms. But oh so slowly.
There is no need to foster a stereotype that non-Catholics are 'RomeOPhobic' for invalid reasons.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1032184' date='Jul 27 2006, 03:34 PM']
Not all of Luther's points were Doctrinally wrong. What about selling indulgences? What about not disciplining corrupt bishops? You admit that Luther was right in many instances and led to needed reforms. But oh so slowly.
There is no need to foster a stereotype that non-Catholics are 'RomeOPhobic' for invalid reasons.
[/quote]
No one claimed [i]every[/i] point Luther made was doctrinally wrong. However, he still did teach heresy and error, as well as instigated schism in the Church.

Btw, selling indulgences is not a [i]doctrinal[/i] issue, but an issue of abuse. Luther was not excommunicated for opposing the sale of indulgences.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='son_of_angels' post='1031045' date='Jul 26 2006, 06:12 AM']
Perhaps, but Luther was also an anti-semitical, bipolar heretic who told people to "sin, and sin boldly!" Most of the other heretics from that people follow suit.

The real reformers during that period were in the Council of Trent.

As I said, Protestants DO have something to fear, and that's ok.

Perhaps, but Luther was also an anti-semitical, bipolar heretic who told people to "sin, and sin boldly!" Most of the other heretics from that period follow suit.

The real reformers during that period were in the Council of Trent.

As I said, Protestants DO have something to fear, and that's ok.
[/quote]
Socrates,
Nobody is bashing Luther? Dice it up with semantics if you will.

The topic of this thread is whether or not Protestants can have a justifiable fear of "Rome" or what Catholics think of them. Just as many Prots don't think Caths are Christian, many Caths don't thik Prots are Christian. That's the point.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1032255' date='Jul 27 2006, 05:59 PM']
Socrates,
Nobody is bashing Luther? Dice it up with semantics if you will.

The topic of this thread is whether or not Protestants can have a justifiable fear of "Rome" or what Catholics think of them. Just as many Prots don't think Caths are Christian, many Caths don't thik Prots are Christian. That's the point.
[/quote]
My point is that Luther's legitimate complaints about abuses in the Church are not the issue, and are not why he is considered heretical. Many saints complained about the same things. The fact that Luther made some legitimate points does not mean that he did not also promote heresy and schism.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1032184' date='Jul 27 2006, 05:34 PM']
Not all of Luther's points were Doctrinally wrong. What about selling indulgences? What about not disciplining corrupt bishops? You admit that Luther was right in many instances and led to needed reforms. But oh so slowly.
There is no need to foster a stereotype that non-Catholics are 'RomeOPhobic' for invalid reasons.
[/quote]
Luther was correct on much of the corruption, but these are not doctrinal matters. The Church is against his ideas of sola scriptura and sola fide.
I never said Protestants were Romeophobic, although I have encountered [i]some[/i] whose upbringing has led to them being wary of all things Catholic without ever truthfully investigating it.

[Anomaly]

Way to avoid the topic and purpose of the thread. It's not about Luther, but about legitimate reasons why some may fear or dislike Catholicism.

Unless you ascribe all Prots as idiots who wouldn't recognize grace if they were hit in the back of the head with it. LOL

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1032270' date='Jul 27 2006, 08:11 PM']
Way to avoid the topic and purpose of the thread. It's not about Luther, but about legitimate reasons why some may fear or dislike Catholicism.

Unless you ascribe all Prots as idiots who wouldn't recognize grace if they were hit in the back of the head with it. LOL
[/quote]
Can you clarify, please?

[Anomaly]

[quote name='thedude' post='1032272' date='Jul 27 2006, 06:13 PM']
Can you clarify, please?
[/quote]Why depend on me? Read the thread from the beginning, before it digressed.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I just want to know if you have a problem with something I said or if you were talking to someone else. God bless!

[Justified Saint]

The thread's original provocation was as to why Protestants have a phobia of Rome and we are reminded that a phobia is a [u]an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation[/u]. Thus the topic of the thread has nothing to do with why Protestants have a "justifiable" or "legitimate" beef with Catholicism and those who have tried to "legitimatize" the fears of Protestants are in fact diverting the thread.

Yet, I enjoy digressions!

[jkaands]

[quote name='thessalonian' post='1032121' date='Jul 27 2006, 02:08 PM']
Read books such as Foxes Book of Marytrs sometime. They liberally throw around words such as papists, popish, romanists, romish, etc. Clear prejudice.
[/quote]

Definitely prejudiced, but based on facts. The Protestants and RC's were to each other like the Sunnis and Shiites are today.

i don't want to go over a lot of disagreeable stuff, but the about 360 burnings of Mary I (Bloody Mary ) are well documented. The Pope excommunicated Elizabeth I and called for her assassination. Thus those bound to obey the pope, ie RC's, were considered very dangerous, and hence actively persecuted, especially as priests trained in France kept sneaking over. The vast majority of the English adored Elizabeth and had hated Mary and Phillip II of Spain, her husband, who later tried to invade England w/ the Armada, which was destroyed.

One poor RC martyr protested on the scaffold that he had been loyal to England save for being Catholic and loyal to Rome: someone shouted from the crowd, "In Rome all treason is contained!!" That was the feelling of the times. There was an active plot to assissinate Elizabeth, in which Mary Queen of Scots unwisely got involved and served as the rallying point; she paid for this treason with her head; others were not so lucky.

The Hutterites supported pacifism and adult baptism. They were no threat to anyone otherwise, but their leaders of the day felt that pacifism was very dangerous.

The persecutions of the Jews in Spain and the huge auto-da-fes are well documented. Thousands were killed; all were expelled, which, together with the expulsion of the Moors, led to the destruction of the Spanish economy. Many 'conversos' were hounded and spied upon until they, too, left Spain. The state of the Spanish universities, bereft of chairmen in any field except religion( because of the Inquisition), did not recover for several centuries.

Many priests were vicious anti-semites, among them St. Vincent (Vicente) de Ferrer. This is well documented in histories of the Jewish persecution and expulsion from Spain and the Jews fleeing to Mexico and then to New Mexico, where I live. All of this history is a big topic here, documented by bilungual historians who study original documents in Madrid, Mexico City, and Santa Fe, the capitol of New Mexico.

There are lots of books on all of these interesting but horrible subjects written by scholars not affiliated with any of the parties, churches or descendants, and gobs of reliable information on the web.

Signing off.

[jkaands]

[quote name='thessalonian' post='1032121' date='Jul 27 2006, 02:08 PM']
Read books such as Foxes Book of Marytrs sometime. They liberally throw around words such as papists, popish, romanists, romish, etc. Clear prejudice.
[/quote]

Definitely prejudiced, but based on facts. The Protestants and RC's were to each other like the Sunnis and Shiites are today.

i don't want to go over a lot of disagreeable stuff, but the about 360 burnings of Mary I (Bloody Mary ) are well documented. The Pope excommunicated Elizabeth I and called for her assassination. Thus those bound to obey the pope, ie RC's, were considered very dangerous, and hence actively persecuted, especially as priests trained in France kept sneaking over. The vast majority of the English adored Elizabeth and had hated Mary and Phillip II of Spain, her husband, who later tried to invade England w/ the Armada, which was destroyed.

One poor RC martyr protested on the scaffold that he had been loyal to England save for being Catholic and loyal to Rome: someone shouted from the crowd, "In Rome all treason is contained!!" That was the feelling of the times. There was an active plot to assissinate Elizabeth, in which Mary Queen of Scots unwisely got involved and served as the rallying point; she paid for this treason with her head; others were not so lucky.

The Hutterites supported pacifism and adult baptism. They were no threat to anyone otherwise, but their leaders of the day felt that pacifism was very dangerous.

The persecutions of the Jews in Spain and the huge auto-da-fes are well documented. Thousands were killed; all were expelled, which, together with the expulsion of the Moors, led to the destruction of the Spanish economy. Many 'conversos' were hounded and spied upon until they, too, left Spain. The state of the Spanish universities, bereft of chairmen in any field except religion( because of the Inquisition), did not recover for several centuries.

Many priests were vicious anti-semites, among them St. Vincent (Vicente) de Ferrer. This is well documented in histories of the Jewish persecution and expulsion from Spain and the Jews fleeing to Mexico and then to New Mexico, where I live. All of this history is a big topic here, documented by bilungual historians who study original documents in Madrid, Mexico City, and Santa Fe, the capitol of New Mexico.

There are lots of books on all of these interesting but horrible subjects written by scholars not affiliated with any of the parties, churches or descendants, and gobs of reliable information on the web.

Signing off.

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='jkaands' post='1032614' date='Jul 27 2006, 09:04 PM']
Definitely prejudiced, but based on facts. The Protestants and RC's were to each other like the Sunnis and Shiites are today.
The persecutions of the Jews in Spain and the huge auto-da-fes are well documented. Thousands were killed; all were expelled, which, together with the expulsion of the Moors, led to the destruction of the Spanish economy. Many 'conversos' were hounded and spied upon until they, too, left Spain. The state of the Spanish universities, bereft of chairmen in any field except religion( because of the Inquisition), did not recover for several centuries.

Many priests were vicious anti-semites, among them St. Vincent (Vicente) de Ferrer. This is well documented in histories of the Jewish persecution and expulsion from Spain and the Jews fleeing to Mexico and then to New Mexico, where I live. All of this history is a big topic here, documented by bilungual historians who study original documents in Madrid, Mexico City, and Santa Fe, the capitol of New Mexico.

There are lots of books on all of these interesting but horrible subjects written by scholars not affiliated with any of the parties, churches or descendants, and gobs of reliable information on the web.

Signing off.
[/quote]

Your comments are highly speculative and suggest a kind of uniformity of scholarship on the matter which simply does not exist. The cultural impact of the Inquistion is a very unclear one and a most difficult link to prove simply because of the long history of the Inqusition in Spain. Many library catalogues in both Spain and the Americas contain several books on the Forbidden Index suggesting that the Index was often lightly enforced. Yet, this could all very well be meaningless since quantitative data is not the measure of cultural history. Certainly Spain suffered in the sciences though it excelled in other areas like literature and the arts. In any case, attributing any single factor to a large scale and lengthly cultural phenomena is fraught with many difficulties.

It is also erroneous to say that the Jewish expulsion wrecked the Spanish economy since the Jews constituted such a small portion of the population. Though its most intense periods dealt with the "converso meance", these periods occupy a very short time frame in the Inquisition's long history.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1032658' date='Jul 27 2006, 10:44 PM']
Your comments are highly speculative and suggest a kind of uniformity of scholarship on the matter which simply does not exist. The cultural impact of the Inquistion is a very unclear one and a most difficult link to prove simply because of the long history of the Inqusition in Spain. Many library catalogues in both Spain and the Americas contain several books on the Forbidden Index suggesting that the Index was often lightly enforced. Yet, this could all very well be meaningless since quantitative data is not the measure of cultural history. Certainly Spain suffered in the sciences though it excelled in other areas like literature and the arts. In any case, attributing any single factor to a large scale and lengthly cultural phenomena is fraught with many difficulties.

It is also erroneous to say that the Jewish expulsion wrecked the Spanish economy since the Jews constituted such a small portion of the population. Though its most intense periods dealt with the "converso meance", these periods occupy a very short time frame in the Inquisition's long history.
[/quote]
Super! Yeah, they just killed my great uncle, not my entire great uncles family. Nothing to put an shadow on the face of the catholic church.

Yep. Cardinal Law was my neighbor. He never molested me. The Catholics are still perfect.