Negative Criticism Of Other Religions

[Papist]

I would not be here if I was not allowed to speak freely, especially Truth. I always thought that is one of the main tenets of forums. However, if I can’t speak Truth without being ugly and offensive, I am doing it wrong and should be reprimanded. I should not have to mock or ridicule someone’s belief when presenting Truth. What I must understand is when I speak Truth to someone; he does not see it as THE truth, but rather my truth.  Hence, the dialog. I am sure people don’t generally post to offend. But one never knows if someone will be offended. And as CatherineM suggested, the offended person should hit the post button.  I for one would be the first to apologize if I have offended someone. 

[homeschoolmom]

A little tip when making a report: Please try to be specific about what you are reporting. Often there will be a report of a long post with the reporter's comment something like "Can you believe this?" Then we are left to try to figure out just exactly what the reporter finds in violation to the rules. Reports like that do tend to sit longer until the mods have more time to do detective work.

 

A more helpful report would be something like, "In the third paragraph, the poster calls Muslims 'ragheads' which violates the rules." Or "The link posted here is to a schismatic religious order" or something along that line. Please don't assume that because something is obvious to you, it's obvious to us. Better to be overly detailed than overly vague.

[Apotheoun]

When a person writes something that I see as anti-Catholic, rather than get offended I take it as an opportunity to explain the truth to them. So for example when a person has told me in the past that Catholics are idolaters because we worship images, I take the comment as an opportunity to explain the doctrine of the incarnation and the dispensation of holy images that flows from that specific doctrinal truth. I also see it as an opportunity to explain the difference between absolute and relative worship (i.e., the difference between adoration and veneration).

 

It seems to me that people get offended far too easily these days, and rather than take the opportunity provided by a perceived offense as an invitation to preach the good news of Christ many would rather have the person punished and in the process close down all conversation on a particular topic. I thank God for the Catholics I knew back in the 1980s who were willing to challenge my false notions and who even said things that I found at the time - for lack of a better word - offensive, because by challenging me in my complacent acceptance of false doctrines (e.g., the false doctrines of sola fidei, sola scriptura, and Calvinist predestinationism, etc.) they slowly brought me to the true faith.

 

Let's face facts here: if a person thinks that Catholics are idolaters or that Catholics teach a "works based" salvation, they are going to give offense to someone when they state their position. But as I see it the Catholic response should not be to take personal offense, but should instead be to defend the faith from the false attack, that is, the Catholic should see the original comment as an opportunity to share the truth about Christ, which has been safeguarded by the Church from ancient times. For example: I have had people tell me that Apostolic Succession is bunk, that the veneration of the saints is idolatry, that the worship (i.e., relative worship) accorded sacred icons, what the person calls "graven images," is a form of evil, and that the doctrine of the Eucharist is a form of cannibalism, etc., but instead of getting upset and complaining about attacks upon the faith, I use the comments of those opposed to the Church as an opportunity to teach the truth. Now whether the person accepts the defense or not is another matter, but I do think that it puts the Church in a good light when Catholics are able to formulate a defense rather than rely on moderator intervention to silence all opposition to Catholicism.

 

Our faith is not weak.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Papist]

When a person writes something that I see as anti-Catholic, rather than get offended I take it as an opportunity to explain the truth to them. So for example when a person has told me in the past that Catholics are idolaters because we worship images, I take the comment as an opportunity to explain the doctrine of the incarnation and the dispensation of holy images that flows from that specific doctrinal truth. I also see it as an opportunity to explain the difference between absolute and relative worship (i.e., the difference between adoration and veneration).

 

It seems to me that people get offended far too easily these days, and rather than take the opportunity provided by a perceived offense as an invitation to preach the good news of Christ many would rather have the person punished and in the process close down all conversation on a particular topic. I thank God for the Catholics I knew back in the 1980s who were willing to challenge my false notions and who even said things that I found at the time - for lack of a better word - offensive, because by challenging me in my complacent acceptance of false doctrines (e.g., the false doctrines of sola fidei, sola scriptura, and Calvinist predestinationism, etc.) they slowly brought me to the true faith.

 

Let's face facts here: if a person thinks that Catholics are idolaters or that Catholics teach a "works based" salvation, they are going to give offense to someone when they state their position. But as I see it the Catholic response should not be to take personal offense, but should instead be to defend the faith from the false attack, that is, the Catholic should see the original comment as an opportunity to share the truth about Christ, which has been safeguarded by the Church from ancient times. For example: I have had people tell me that Apostolic Succession is bunk, that the veneration of the saints is idolatry, that the worship (i.e., relative worship) accorded sacred icons, what the person calls "graven images," is a form of evil, and that the doctrine of the Eucharist is a form of cannibalism, etc., but instead of getting upset and complaining about attacks upon the faith, I use the comments of those opposed to the Church as an opportunity to teach the truth. Now whether the person accepts the defense or not is another matter, but I do think that it puts the Church in a good light when Catholics are able to formulate a defense rather than rely on moderator intervention to silence all opposition to Catholicism.

 

Our faith is not weak.

 

Yes. I don't think anyone is saying contrary to this. There will be times when no matter how charitable and soft I am, I will offend. Trust me.  When engaging in these dialogs, one should not fear of offending. Yet, be humble and apologize if offense was taken and keep the conversation moving forward.  One's feelings and pride can be a real impediment to a would-be productive conversation.  I also agree with you that too many people get offended these days. Like I violated his God given human rights if I offend him. Offending somebody/group is the biggest sin in the eyes of our culture.....which offends me :)

 

Same calm...Truth fears no question.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Papist

[Basilisa Marie]

Okay, thanks you guys, especially to HSMom and Dust.  I think I have a better idea of it now. :) 

[Apotheoun]

Yeah as a former High Church Episcopalian I have told Anglicans that they do not have a valid priesthood and that as a consequence their Eucharistic celebrations - however well meaning they are - do not actually consecrate the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, but what else should I do? Lie to them and say that they do have a valid priesthood and Eucharist? Sometimes the truth, no matter how charitably presented will offend. Such is life.

[Roamin Catholic]

How old is too old for an uncharitable jerk reply to be reported?

 

Just an FYI; uncharitable doesn't automatically equal a warn/edit. Now, if it also happens to be a personal attack, then yes; it does cross a line. 

[PhuturePriest]

The Dustites are a disgusting religion of beings who sit around all day on their computers and drink beer.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

When a person writes something that I see as anti-Catholic, rather than get offended I take it as an opportunity to explain the truth to them. So for example when a person has told me in the past that Catholics are idolaters because we worship images, I take the comment as an opportunity to explain the doctrine of the incarnation and the dispensation of holy images that flows from that specific doctrinal truth. I also see it as an opportunity to explain the difference between absolute and relative worship (i.e., the difference between adoration and veneration).

 

That's a model way of approaching such a situation. The only time it fails is when I talk to Muslims about misconceptions they have about us stemming from inaccuracies in their holy texts. It's much harder to debate that.

[Slappo]

The Dustites are a disgusting religion of beings who sit around all day on their computers and drink beer.

 

I see nothing wrong with that religion. Can I be a Dustite and a Catholic at the same time? Sit on my computer and drink Chimay? :winner:

[PhuturePriest]

I see nothing wrong with that religion. Can I be a Dustite and a Catholic at the same time? Sit on my computer and drink Chimay? :winner:

 

Not unless you'd like to go to hell for being a sloth.

[homeschoolmom]

Not unless you'd like to go to hell for being a sloth.

[Amppax]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba7rRfKIHxU

 

[Slappo]

Not unless you'd like to go to hell for being a sloth.

 

I could be diligently working on my computer y'know.

 

Accounting makes so much more sense after a few beers. All the problems tend to disappear and fade into the background.

[4588686]

 

Not unless you'd like to go to hell for being a sloth.

 

 

 

Vile beasts of hell