ECT Why shouldn't I convert from Evangelical Protestant to Catholic?

[lifeisgood]

The following comment is from an article written here regarding relics: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/04/relics/ This article itself, if you read it is excellent and informative, but the comments back and forth between Catholic and Protestant are brilliantly insightful. The following is the last comment from below the article in the link above...

I don't mean to be contrary, but I have a question, why concentrate on the relics instead of on the one the relics represent. I mean, why concentrate on the representation instead of the one being represented?

My thing is if I had given my son to someone who does not deserve anything and he/she is no longer a debtor because of my son and what he did, and then I see that instead of talking about my son and what he did exclusively, he/she is talking about something or someone else instead of my son and what he did for that person, I would be really ticked off about it. Now, that's my opinion and no one has to agree with me.

 

[chrysostom]

I don't mean to be contrary, but I have a question, why concentrate on the relics instead of on the one the relics represent.

who says we do?
and
why do you concentrate on them?

 

[Nihilo]

If I had given my son to someone who does not deserve anything and he/she is no longer a debtor because of my son and what he did, and then I see that instead of talking about my son and what he did exclusively, he/she is talking about something or someone else instead of my son and what he did for that person, I would be really ticked off about it. Now, that's my opinion and no one has to agree with me.

The highlit IMO are the Lost, not Catholics.

 

[Nihilo]

The following comment is from an article written here regarding relics: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/04/relics/ This article itself, if you read it is excellent and informative, but the comments back and forth between Catholic and Protestant are brilliantly insightful. The following is the last comment from below the article in the link above...

Thanks for posting.

Peter Leithart recently wrote an article titled “Idolatry and the Reformation.” In it he claims that idolatry was at least one of the problems the early Protestants attempted to address, and that they sought to address it through high sacramentalism, among other ways. The allegedly idolatrous practices to which Leithart refers (e.g. veneration of relics, icons, saints) are not, from a Catholic point of view, idolatrous, for reasons explained in comment #18 above.

One of the Church's key responses to the Reformation was an implicit¹ admission that the Reformation was enabled by her own lack of a single authoritative source of Church teachings on faith and morals. With the printing press a solution to this problem presented itself and the Church produced, promulgated and published the Tridentine (from the council at Trent), or Roman Catechism.


¹ - If not explicit. I'm not familiar with any Church documents spelling it out . . . which doesn't mean there isn't one or more out there.

So this disagreement shows that we need to step back and not just compare respective definitions of idolatry, but compare the basis and authority of these respective definitions, and make sure that our criticisms of the other’s practices do not beg the question [in the presuppose-the-truth-of-our-own-position sense].

The highlit prompted the following text.

838 The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.²

The Catechism of the Catholic Church​

Emphasis mine.

This is a wide, wide net! Saint Peter, the eternal fisher of human beings!


² - The rest of the text: "Those who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

 

[lifeisgood]

who says we do?
and
why do you concentrate on them?

For starters ALL Roman Catholic members of my own family.
Also my Roman Catholic friends.
They all want to talk about the rosary, or Mary, or the Pope (now permitting Islamic prayers for the first in the Vatican --- http://english.alarabiya.net/en/New...slamic-prayers-to-be-held-at-the-Vatican.html), etc.

When I start telling them that it is Jesus Christ and what He did exclusively, they all simply don't want to talk about Him.

That's my experience.

 

[Cruciform]

hear, hear

:thumb:​

 

[JosephR]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relic

Reliquary and skull of Saint Ivo of Kermartin (St. Yves or St. Ives), (1253–1303) in Tréguier, Brittany, France

Hi Cruciform.. I just wanted to say what I am sure bothers most non Catholic Christians,myself included is the graven image overtones of the so called relics. As you can see in the links and the pic that is mos deff a graven image made into an idol.. I know you will defend your church and you dont worship Idols personally and you are a smart,sometimes kind man, and we have all been over this time and time again.. But this I am sure is the issue.again lol

Goodday and Godbless you

 

[WizardofOz]

Catholic puppet

Catholic puppet

Inability or refusal, it's all the same to me.

We'll have to alert the publishers of the Oxford English Dictionary that Wizard says the concepts of "inability" and "refusal" are identical. :doh:

Straw man fallacy. Try again.

In some cases, absolutely. I'm not here for a brunch party where we can all sit around drinking tea, giggling, and gabbing. This is a theological forum where information is shared and debated. There are times when it is a more prudent use of my time to cite a source which accurately represents my own position on an issue, rather than spending a half hour composing a post that contains essentially the same information. You can do with the information whatever you like. That's between you and God. But whining about having to click on a citation strikes one as disingenuous at best.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

Be sure to tell Knight that you know how to run his forum better than he does. He and other mods have repeatedly made it a point to stress that this forum is for discussion and not mindless link dropping.

Oddly enough, your links didn't do much to address my question. You obviously feel that proving links is sufficient without attempting to determine whether or not the links address the question posed.

In the future, if the only effort you can put into responding to me is link dropping, don't bother. I'd rather engage with people who are not too lazy to use their own words.

 

[WizardofOz]

Read the statement you quoted again. Catholics invoke the intercession of the saint whose body is being venerated (honored). We do not speak to the body itself. So, no, Catholics decidedly do not "pray to dead bodies." Please get your facts straight.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

Then, what is the point of having the body present? :think:

Again, if all you have to offer is your here, here, and here lazy link dropping, don't bother responding.

 

[Cruciform]

...the graven image overtones of the so called relics. As you can see in the links and the pic that is mos deff a graven image...

I'll just stop you there (because you're about to make a false statement), and ask you to read a single brief tract that explains the historic Catholic position.

I know you will defend your church and you dont worship Idols personally and you are a smart, sometimes kind...

WHAT?! :madmad:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

Straw man fallacy. Try again.

Sadly, you seem to have no idea whatsoever what a Straw Man Fallacy actually is.

...this forum is for discussion and not mindless link dropping.

The sources I provide are hardly "mindless." Rather, it is the glib dismissal of, and refusal to engage with, such sources that is mindless.

In the future, if the only effort you can put into responding to me is link dropping, don't bother.

You not only want to ask the questions, but demand to dictate how the questions are answered as well. Nice try, but no. In any case, the sources I cite aren't only (or even primarily) for you, but are for any genuinely interested and honest readers who might be following the thread. So, if you can't be bothered to click your mouse, just continue to ignore the relevant information that's being offered. It's not really there for you anyway.

I'd rather engage with people who are not too lazy to use their own words.

I would consider "lazy" those, like yourself, who find the task of clicking on a citation to just be too much effort. As I've said, your transparent excuses for avoiding such answers are noted.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

Then, what is the point of having the body present?

The body represents the soul of the Saint in heaven. (If you had bothered to read the sources provided earlier, you wouldn't have needed to ask this question, or most others that might occur to a non-Catholic.)

 

[WizardofOz]

Sadly, you seem to have no idea whatsoever what a Straw Man Fallacy actually is.

Well, it's becoming clear that one of us doesn't.

When you say "Wizard says the concepts of "inability" and "refusal" are identical" you've crafted a strawman as I said no such thing.

Therefore, you've 'rebutted' a strawman rather than my actual argument.

The sources I provide are hardly "mindless."

And another. They are not. Your use of links in lieu of actual rebuttal, on the other hand, certainly is.

Rather, it is the glib dismissal of, and refusal to engage with, such sources that is mindless.

Odd since I read your sources and even quoted them in his very thread.

Your inability to follow along is noted.

You not only want to ask the questions, but demand to dictate how the questions are answered as well. Nice try, but no. In any case, the sources I cite aren't only (or even primarily) for you, but are for any genuinely interested and honest readers who might be following the thread. So, if you can't be bothered to click your mouse, just continue to ignore the relevant information that's being offered. It's not really there for you anyway.

I would consider "lazy" those, like yourself, who find the task of clicking on a citation to just be too much effort. As I've said, your transparent excuses for avoiding such answers are noted.

Supra

 

[WizardofOz]

The body represents the soul of the Saint in heaven. (If you had bothered to read the sources provided earlier, you wouldn't have needed to ask this question, or most others that might occur to a non-Catholic.)

:yawn:

That still doesn't answer the question.

 

[Cruciform]

Well, it's becoming clear that one of us doesn't.

It's you. (Unless you hold a university degree in philosophy...?)

When you say "Wizard says the concepts of "inability" and "refusal" are identical" you've crafted a strawman as I said no such thing.

Your statement:

"Inability or refusal, it's all the same to me."​

Try again?

And another. They are not. Your use of links in lieu of actual rebuttal, on the other hand, certainly is.

Already answered.

Odd since I read your sources and even quoted them in his very thread.

Your level of reading comprehension needs improvement.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

That still doesn't answer the question.

Already answered here.

 

[WizardofOz]

It's you. (Unless you hold a university degree in philosophy...?)

Ah, only people who do can understand what a strawman fallacy is.

Whoever told you that lied to you. Sorry.

Your statement:

"Inability or refusal, it's all the same to me."​

Try again?

In regard to your general inability or refusal to engage in dialogue, it's all the same to me as the end result (the underachieving post quality you produce) is the same regardless of the excuse behind it.

You either failed to comprehend the context or were being intellectually dishonest when you said "We'll have to alert the publishers of the Oxford English Dictionary that Wizard says the concepts of "inability" and "refusal" are identical", as if I said this in absolute terms.

Cruciform, meet the strawman you created.

Already answered.

See rationalized.

Rather, it is the glib dismissal of, and refusal to engage with, such sources that is mindless.

Odd since I read your sources and even quoted them in his very thread.

Your inability to follow along is noted.

Your level of reading comprehension needs improvement.

I engaged them. I read them. I even quoted them.

Sorry you missed it.

Again your inability to follow along has been noted.

Now, let's talk about your reading comprehension problem.

Again, if all you have to offer is your here, here, and here lazy link dropping, don't bother responding.

Already answered here.

:doh:

 

[Cruciform]

Ah, only people who do can understand what a strawman fallacy is.

Straw Man Fallacy (Post #1195.)

...regardless of the reasons behind it.

Fixed it.

Cruciform, meet the strawman you created.

Already answered.

I engaged them. I read them. I even quoted them...Again your inability to follow along has been noted. Now, let's talk about your reading comprehension problem.

Already answered (Post #1191).



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[RichRock]

Thanks for posting.
One of the Church's key responses to the Reformation was an implicit¹ admission that the Reformation was enabled by her own lack of a single authoritative source of Church teachings on faith and morals. With the printing press a solution to this problem presented itself and the Church produced, promulgated and published the Tridentine (from the council at Trent), or Roman Catechism.


¹ - If not explicit. I'm not familiar with any Church documents spelling it out . . . which doesn't mean there isn't one or more out there.

The highlit prompted the following text.

838 The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter.²

The Catechism of the Catholic Church​

Emphasis mine.

This is a wide, wide net! Saint Peter, the eternal fisher of human beings!


² - The rest of the text: "Those who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

I'm finding the Catechism to be invaluable in clarifying matters. I musy say I do like the fact there is a central teaching authority published in the Catechism of the Catholic Church I can reference, instead of myself coming up with possible multiple different interpretations like every other man and his dog (ie denominations) without it.

 

[chrysostom]

One of the Church's key responses to the Reformation was an implicit¹ admission that the Reformation was enabled by her own lack of a single authoritative source of Church teachings on faith and morals. With the printing press a solution to this problem presented itself and the Church produced, promulgated and published the Tridentine (from the council at Trent), or Roman Catechism.

I like this

catholics do not need to read, know, or understand the 700 plus pages of this catechism

the primary purpose of this thing is to refute the endless challenges by protestants to justify their separation