Has anyone seen this letter from the publisher "Le Monier" to the WTS that he is talking about. It looks like he is quoting from a magazine article. It would be a fun little tidbit.
Catholic priest condemns & blasts Watchtower Society...
by Newly Enlightened 14 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Newly Enlightened
I haven't seen it.
-
Terry
Whew!
What is true is true because no false argument can prevail against it. Facts and evidence cannot be the property of a church, denomination or religion
because truth is universal. Now the word Catholic really means "universal" but the Church that bears that adjective has been around long enough
to have been slapped down and kicked to the curb for the corruption and lying and misadventures of the past.
What are we to learn from where the Catholic Church is RIGHT NOW that we can benefit from?
First of all, the Church has come to its senses on certain facts that it fought against in the past such as Evolution and the need for realistic historicity.
I welcome ANY voice (Church or otherwise) that pins the tail on the Watchtower donkey by calling them out for DISHONESTY in presentation of "facts".
How can we feel otherwise?
IF a lowdown dirty dog barks and scares away a burglar should we kick the dog or pat it on the head for a job well done?
See what I am saying?
-
kepler
I am not a practicing Catholic, but I did attend the oxymoronically named institution known as Catholic parochial schools. I became a Catholic after age 12 subject to circumstances of growing up. And then left with no bitterness other than to say that I thought I should think things out more than I had.
Prior to those five years culminating in high school graduation, I had been exposed to several Protestant traditions and in summer camp one year I read most of the Old Testament on my own. Mystifying.
For those five years in the midwest and the NE of the US, aside from the observing the WTBTS billboards off in Brooklyn from the Staten Island Ferry, on the streets and in the schools and in the churches, the society had ZERO impact on my life or as a topic of discussion - save for the following:
1. It was observed at the time that JW movement was growing very fast.
2. It was observed that the proselytizers on the street probably had a better command of Bible verse than the average Catholic.
Otherwise, no comment.
As far as our instructors in classes were concerned, our parish priests and our religious weeklies or monthlies were concerned, there were better things to do. There were our own personal struggles with grace, upholding our faith, supporting our missions, determining whether we had vocations, maintaining our way of live, conducting ourselves ethically in our faith, learning and upholding it in public and private. There was attending mass, preparing to receive communion.... Debating the war, the Kennedys... Preparing for life. Deciding whether one had a vocation to be a priest, nun or brother - or the obvious rites of spring. You name it. This was true in the midwest or the north east as far as I could tell.
In passing many of my friends growing up and some of my relatives did attend seminaries and some even took holy orders and assumed vows. Many of these were contemplative. My instructors in school were not as priests but as workers in poverty, chastity, obedience - often being assigned overseas to missions in places that are now off the JW yearbook map. Some are still there teaching in schools.
Growing up I was much more aware of the Muhammad Speaks as an evangelical movement. Accousted on the street, I actually paid 50 cents or so for the privilege of his rants. And before I was a Catholic, I was aware of their comic books ( Treasure Chest?) which were far more appealing than the JW equivalents I never saw until I actually became involved with an adherent.
The whole matter has given me much time to reflect on differences between various Christian sects and their heritage from Jewish traditions. And there is clearly enough guilt to go around when it comes to sins of commission. But what I do find in thenarrow band discussion of past atrocities performed by Catholicism or in the name of the Pope is largely a long stream of Anglo-Saxon rationalizations. How else could 19th century WASP society justify itself unless there was a Christian history that got off the rail within decades after Christ had died and then was recovered by a series of Protestant heroes in the 16th to 19th century? Especially if they spoke English.
Imagine looking at this heavenly entitlement for centuries from across the Irish Sea. Or as a native in 17th century New England having a Congregationalist explain what Joshua's exploits meant to them in the new promised land of their own.
We are left with the absurd notion that the Protestant tradition tiptoed across the world and never did any harm to non-European peoples, never worked hand in hand with imperialism or served as its hand maiden. And centuries after Luther when Anglo-Scot evangelism kicked off to share its vision with the world, they moved out into continents that had already learned something of Christ from 16th and 17th century missionaries whose stories I will spare you the details of. For an interesting perspective, see H. G. Wells "Outline of History".
For a tradition that presumes that it is so much more superior, it doesn't seem to leave a vestige in any area for any common hopes. A 21st century Catholic, when speaking of Popes, has the heritage of John XXIII, John Paul II and the prospects for Francis the I. A mythology if you will, but here goes: JP-II as a follower of Christ - and as a Pole - stands up to the Soviet Union and does more than armies to avert Armageddon - something that seems awaited avidly in other quarters with hopes of technicolor broadcast. And Francis, a Jesuit who shows up in Brazil of all places - and three million flock to see him. No coercion. No district convention. He's just there to talk. Bigger than futbol. A get together about half the size of the whole JW movement in one city Brazilian city.
-
Londo111
marked