So, why do you really hate the Roman Catholic Church?

by StAnn 68 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Rapunzel

  In the historical development of the United States, anti-Catholicism was in large part, although not entirely, connected to, and associated with anti-immigrant sentiment. Of course, the hostility to both groups - Roman Catholics and immigrants - can self-evidently be attributed to fear and ignorance; a large part of the problem is due to sheer ignorance.

  As the French say, "Plus ca change, plus ca reste le meme." The more things change, the more they remain the same. It seems that everyone is looking for a "strawman" or a "scapegoat." Early in U.S. history, Catholics were viewed with hostility and contempt; they were considered "aliens." People were suspicious of where their loyalty lay. Were they involved in a secret conspiracy with the papacy?

  Then it was the Jews who were regarded as such. And then the Russians were the horrible, spectral "bogeyman" on the horizon, just waiting to take over the U.S. and steal our corn for themselves because, as everyone knew, "them Russkies never could grow no corn, nohow." With the collapse of the U.S.S.R., it seems that Islam or "Islamo-terrorism" has "stepped up to bat," as it were. Muslims are now personae non grata. It's never going to change. That's why, I believe, that for Carl Gustave Jung, the "scapegoat" was one of several of his proposed "archetypes." We humans do indeed to be somehow genetically pre-disposed to searh out and persecute scapegoats.
• 

  Rapunzel

  Ironically enough, "Deputy Dog's" post provides a perfect example of how ''ignorance has made tremendous progress." I remember the case of a clergyman being asked if he were thankful to God even for his [the clergyman's] own ignorance. When the clergyman answered in the affirmative, thus came the retort: "You have a lot to be thankful for." Like that clergyman, and in much the same spirit, Deputy Dog truly has a lot to be thankful for.
• 

  Rapunzel

  It should not be necessary for me to do so, but just let me say that the Roman Catholic Church has never denied that salvation derives from grace and faith in Jesus Christ. For Catholics, Christ is agnus dei - the lamb of God - who takes away the sins of the world. To make the claim that the Church has ever denied this is slanderous, if done so knowingly. However, in all probability, it is probably due to grossly horrific ignorance. As such, it may be pardonned.

  I say this as an unbelieving [or if you prefer, "lapsed"] Catholic. I wonder if Deputy Dog has any idea of the number of other churches that the RCC is "in communion" with. It is indeed very bizarre that he should "dredge up," in the twenty-first century, sectarian polemics that have their origins in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. One would not be remiss in hoping that we have all gotten beyond that point. But I suppose that ignorance - like hope - springs eternal.
• 

  Narkissos

  http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
• 

  Satanus

  Can't say that i hate it, although, i don't believe any of it. I did a freebee mural, a background for a jesus statue in a catholic church.
  
  S
• 

  kazar

  I do not like Catholicism. I used to hate it for good reason. I was raised a Catholic until I was seventeen--at which time I met JW's and converted. It's true, I merely traded one hierarchy for another. But, I digress; I hated the dogma of:

  Papal infallibilty

  All the different kinds of sins; some punishable by eternal torment in hellfire; others punishable by Purgatory or Limbo (I don't mean the dance).

  Having to run to confession to rid oneself of sin in order to escapte the hellfire.

  The Holy Days.

  The practice of Novenas ( Lighting candles - which one had to buy) to pray for the release of souls in Purgatory. One never knew if the loved one they were praying for was in Purgatory or Hell. I could go on and on.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Rapunzel

  I say this as an unbelieving [or if you prefer, "lapsed"] Catholic. I wonder if Deputy Dog has any idea of the number of other churches that the RCC is "in communion" with. It is indeed very bizarre that he should "dredge up," in the twenty-first century, sectarian polemics that have their origins in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. One would not be remiss in hoping that we have all gotten beyond that point. But I suppose that ignorance - like hope - springs eternal.

  Can I take this as your renouncing the anathemas of Trent? If so both of us will have much to be thankful for. Just keep in mind the "Roman Catholic Church" has yet to renounce them.
• 

  IP_SEC

  i despise all religion equally.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Nark

  Did you see this a few weeks back?

  From: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19692094/

  Pope: Other denominations not true churches

  Benedict issues statement asserting that Jesus established ‘only one church’

  MSNBC News Services updated 9:52 a.m. ET, Tues., July. 10, 2007

  LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.

  Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church.

  On Saturday, Benedict revisited another key aspect of Vatican II by reviving the old Latin Mass. Traditional Catholics cheered the move, but more liberal ones called it a step back from Vatican II.

  Benedict, who attended Vatican II as a young theologian, has long complained about what he considers the erroneous interpretation of the council by liberals, saying it was not a break from the past but rather a renewal of church tradition.

  In the latest document — formulated as five questions and answers — the Vatican seeks to set the record straight on Vatican II’s ecumenical intent, saying some contemporary theological interpretation had been “erroneous or ambiguous” and had prompted confusion and doubt.

  It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, “Dominus Iesus,” which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the “means of salvation.”

  In the new document and an accompanying commentary, which were released as the pope vacations here in Italy’s Dolomite mountains, the Vatican repeated that position.

  “Christ ‘established here on earth’ only one church,” the document said. The other communities “cannot be called ‘churches’ in the proper sense” because they do not have apostolic succession — the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ’s original apostles.

  ‘Identity of the Catholic faith’The Rev. Sara MacVane of the Anglican Centre in Rome, said there was nothing new in the document.

  “I don’t know what motivated it at this time,” she said. “But it’s important always to point out that there’s the official position and there’s the huge amount of friendship and fellowship and worshipping together that goes on at all levels, certainly between Anglican and Catholics and all the other groups and Catholics.”

  The document said Orthodox churches were indeed “churches” because they have apostolic succession and that they enjoyed “many elements of sanctification and of truth.” But it said they lack something because they do not recognize the primacy of the pope — a defect, or a “wound” that harmed them, it said.

  “This is obviously not compatible with the doctrine of primacy which, according to the Catholic faith, is an ‘internal constitutive principle’ of the very existence of a particular church,” the commentary said.

  Despite the harsh tone of the document, it stresses that Benedict remains committed to ecumenical dialogue.

  “However, if such dialogue is to be truly constructive, it must involve not just the mutual openness of the participants but also fidelity to the identity of the Catholic faith,” the commentary said.

  ‘Not backtracking on ecumenical commitment’The document, signed by the congregation prefect, U.S. Cardinal William Levada, was approved by Benedict on June 29, the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul — a major ecumenical feast day.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Rapunzel

  In case you are not familure with Trent, the red discribes me

  The Council of Trent The Sixth Session

  JUSTIFICATION CANONS

  CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

  CANON II.-If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema.

  CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

  CANON IV. If any one shall affirm, that man’s freewill, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, cooperate with God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases, but that it is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed"!

  CANON V.- If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!

  CANON VI.-If any one saith, that it is not in man's power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.

  CANON VII.-If any one saith, that all works done before Justification, in whatsoever way they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; or that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins: let him be anathema.

  CANON VIII.-If any one saith, that the fear of hell,-whereby, by grieving for our sins, we flee unto the mercy of God, or refrain from sinning,-is a sin, or makes sinners worse; let him be anathema.

  CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

  CANON X.-If any one saith, that men are just without the justice of Christ, whereby He merited for us to be justified; or that it is by that justice itself that they are formally just; let him be anathema.

  CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.

  CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.

  CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.

  CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.

  CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.

  CANON XVI.-If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema.

  CANON XVII.-If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema.

  CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.

  CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.

  CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXI.-If any one saith, that Christ Jesus was given of God to men, as a redeemer in whom to trust, and not also as a legislator whom to obey; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXII.-If any one saith, that the justified, either is able to persevere, without the special help of God, in the justice received; or that, with that help, he is not able; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXIII.-lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,-except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXV.-If any one saith, that, in every good work, the just sins venially at least, or-which is more intolerable still-mortally, and consequently deserves eternal punishments; and that for this cause only he is not damned, that God does not impute those works unto damnation; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXVI.-If any one saith, that the just ought not, for their good works done in God, to expect and hope for an eternal recompense from God, through His mercy and the merit of Jesus Christ, if so be that they persevere to the end in well doing and in keeping the divine commandments; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXVII.-If any one saith, that there is no mortal sin but that of infidelity; or, that grace once received is not lost by any other sin, however grievous and enormous, save by that of infidelity ; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXVIII.-If any one saith, that, grace being lost through sin, faith also is always lost with it; or, that the faith which remains, though it be not a lively faith, is not a true faith; or, that he, who has faith without charity, is not as Christ taught; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXIX.-If any one saith, that he, who has fallen after baptism, is not able by the grace of God to rise again; or, that he is able indeed to recover the justice which he has lost, but by faith alone without the sacrament of Penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and universal Church-instructed by Christ and his Apostles-has hitherto professed, observed, and taugh; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

  CANON XXXI.-If any one saith, that the justified sins when he performs good works with a view to an eternal recompense; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXXII.-If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of
  glory; let him be anathema.

  CANON XXXIII.-If any one saith,that,by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.

  I'd say the RCC cut me off, wouldn't you? Some may call that "hate"