Catholic services do not use the "Christian" Bible. They occasionally quote from a book they refer to as the "bible" and they don't actually use it.
Carrie displays her vast ignorance of the Catholic mass. Not only does the Sunday mass use readings directly from the old testament, the Psalms, the epistles and the Gospel, bits of scripture are incorporated throughout the remainder of the mass. Her remark is simply ignorant.
I was forced to sit through services for years and never once saw "A BIBLE" cracked open.
Well if she had actually watched she would have seen the Lectionary brought forward to the podium to be read by the priest for the Gospel reading. Further if she had looked around, she might have noted a misellette or two with the readings for the day right in front of her.
I think there is some historical ignorance here to. For centuries most of the common people COULD NOT READ! The Gospel was proclaimed and the emphasis was on HEARING the word, not reading it.
Also, and this is common sense here people, if you take some phrases from one book (say the Christian Bible) and they are used in the Catholic bible or in mass IT DOESNT MEAN YOU ARE USING THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE!Just like if I paraphrase a medical text say...explaining the transmission of AIDS (listed in the medical texts as through bodily secretions) and I say...add "and through skin to skin contact or eating raw foods" THIS IS NOT THE SAME THING AS THE MEDICAL TEXT I "copied" from says. Therefore, my "new" book IS NOT THE SAME AS THE ORIGINAL!
If it's the original she wants she best check out the Catholic version of the bible. The one she uses is missing a few books that were removed approximately 500 years ago.
I don't get this ongoing argument that the Catholics keep trying to make on this blog. If you are Catholic and believe your religious choice is correct, then what are you doing here?
Defending our faith against lies and misinformation.
Your welcome here, I am sure, but why are you so bent on trying to change Candy's mind.
At this point I'm not. I am more than satisfied to just get the truth out about what Catholics believe for for folks who are actually looking for it.
She gets to think and write whatever she wants.
See my previous post. Having the "right" to do something doesn't make it "right."
Why do you keep trying to claim that there are similarities? How would you even know, being you are so devoted to your religion?
I could reverse that question back to you Carrie.
According to the Christian Bible, the Lord specifically commands those who serve him to NEVER worship ANY OTHER GODS BEFORE HIM (for example the Pope, Mary and the tons of Saints worshiped by Catholics)
We don't worship the Pope, Mary or the saints. It's that simple.
and Jesus very specifically states that "NO ONE COMES TO THE FATHER BUT BY ME"!
That's what the Catholic church teaches as well.
The entire NT of the Bible is dedicated to educating the reader that they can DO NOTHING to DESERVE Salvation, but can ONLY BE GIVEN IT AS A GIFT!
Might want to take another tour through the book of James.
Now in the last several months the pope recently proclaimed not only that the catholic church is the "only" true church and the only way to salvation AND that Muslims and Catholics worship the same God.
In other words, directly against the Word of the ONE TRUE GOD (Yes, I BELIEVE that the GOD I serve it the ONE TRUE GOD and I get to make that decision and I don't waste my time on trying to get other religions to ok it).
It might go against your interpretation of God's word Carrie - which is an entirely different matter all together.
Lastly, if you read this blog, for whatever reason and you don't agree. Do it like an adult. If you have a guestion, ask it NICELY.
I tried that. Nothing got through until Candy finally SCREAMED at me on the front page of her blog. A lot of people think I started this blog - the truth is Candy started it by the way she mishandled my sincere attempts to communicate with her.
Candy can write WHATEVER she wants to. If you don't want to read it or disagree...here is a novel idea DON'T READ IT!
Already handled that lame argument.
39 comments:
I'm a protestant Christian, and I really appreciate learning the Truth! I have never found this site to be offensive - rather, I'm shocked and dismayed at Candy's displays/attitudes/and remarks, as well as that of some of her readers!
I grew up always hearing that catholics were wrong and were going to hell. I was always taught that they never read the Bible, worshipped saints and Mary and many other misconceptions! Recently, I've been learning that these things are just not true. I have been meeting more and more catholic women who are just like me - conservative, homeschooling, large families and following hard after the Lord. Who knows the heart? Only God. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved! Isn't that the bottom line?
Yes, there are differences - sola scriptura being the first that comes to mind - but on the essentials, do we believe the same thing?
Apologetics are so tiring. You hear the same objections time after time, you give your answers, and yet people either have no comprehension, or they don't actually listen to the answers. It's amazing the same stuff that keeps getting brought up and answered time and time again. It's like this with Candy and her followers, it's like this on several msg boards I've been a part of, it's like this on blogs, and it's like this in person. I actually had to quit answering my phone when I converted because I got so tired of answering the same questions and not being listened to. It's always the SAME THINGS. (Nothing new under the sun...)
I admire you Elena, for keeping up the good fight. I just don't have the energy or the stomach for it. I find myself reading this stuff and after a while it just makes me sick. I am so glad there are Catholics like you and the other contributors on this blog, as well as people like Karl Keating, Dave Armstrong, Stephen Ray, Jimmy Akin etc., who will continue to defend the false accusations against the Holy Catholic Church.
My interest in the Catholic Church was first piqued on a Christian parenting board because of a huge debate that errupted between the non-Catholics (99% of that board) and the handful of Catholics there. In the end, there was only one Catholic left trying desperately to defend her faith and because I was open-minded I carefully read and hung onto every word they said. Her answers were always logical and sensible. I noticed how non-Catholics kept beating their points to death, even after she had thoughtfully answered them. I began my own research because of this debate (which was eventually locked, since the board was supposed to be a parenting board). Almost a year later, I was sitting in the office of a local Catholic priest discussing my conversion.
So don't give up - I know there has to be a few people out there who are reading and actually thinking through this - thanks so much for not giving up.
Kozimom, I am also protestant, and that is exactly the way I feel!
Kozlmom & Bethany- Thank you so much for taking the time to learn and understand the Catholic Faith without passing judgment. If more people were like you both the world would be a much nicer place!
Just an observation- I have been Catholic since birth, a cradle Catholic if you will, and I do not ever remember once hearing about the Protestant faith in the same way as some Protestants describe hearing about the Catholic Faith. I have a question stemming from that- Why do Protestant churches spend so much time telling their congregations about what Catholics believe? Why do they not spend time explaining there own positions without resorting to attacking another faith?
It seems, from explanations from various Protestants, that the heart of the Protestant Church is judgment, strife, and condemnation. Since we will be judged by our fruits maybe those Protestants should rethink what "man" has been telling them.
Blondie- I agree that apologetics are very tiring. I also feel weary from all the defending that one must do when no one seems to be listening. Keep defending when you can because this debate is not going away. :(
This is what I asked after Carrie's comment, and Candy then posted.
Now, I'd like to be really clear on this, to make sure I'm understanding it correctly. It has to be an actual bible, not another book/booklet/what have you with scripture verses printed on it. And it has to be a "Christian" bible, not a "Catholic" bible, which I think I'm reading as not a translation approved by the Vatican, because "Catholic" bibles aren't real bibles. So, if you are not holding and reading from an actual, physical, "Christian" bible, then it's not really worship? Do I have this right?
Hit post before finishing, sorry. I really would like an answer to this.
Wow! Carrie's church must read the entire "Christian Bible" cover to cover during every single church service, since it sounds like she doesn't believe in only reading parts or quotes from the Bible.
I'd like to echo Erika in saying thank you to the non-Catholics here (Kozimom, Bethany, anyone else) who are open-minded enough to take the time to learn and understand the truths of the Catholic faith. I don't mind agreeing to disagree - it's when people misrepresent the Catholic church and then debate against those falsehoods that gets to me. (I think that's what is called a strawman.)
i posted just a little while ago on Candy's site in answer to Carrie... pointed out that if a Catholic person was telling everyone that all Evangelical Christian pastors were like Jimmy Swaggert (or any other TV evangelist), she would want to tell them the truth!
also have the same feelings as my mom (kozimom) on the differences between Catholicism and Evangelical Christianity.
But what IS the real Catholic doctrine on salvation?
haha, ok, Candy didn't publish my comment on Carrie's comment...
"But what IS the real Catholic doctrine on salvation?"
Maybe these links will help:
Assurance of salvation?: http://www.catholic.com/library/assurance_of_salvation.asp
Q&A: http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0502sbs.asp
Let me try posting that first link again by breaking up the line:
http://www.catholic.com/library/
assurance_of_salvation
Holly Elise, two great sites to learn more about what Catholicism REALLY teaches are:
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/
and
http://www.catholic.com/
For the latter, check the library, to the lefthand side for some great articles.
Catholics believe that we are saved through God's grace, by our faith, as is manifest by our works. We do not believe that you must have a single moment or emotional experience of "being saved" in order to gain salvation.
One last try:
http://www.catholic.com/library/
assurance_of_salvation.asp
Sorry about that.
Here is another great site for learning about the Catholic faith:
http://www.biblechristiansociety.
com/
There are many free audios that you can download.
This is what Catholic Doctrine Teaches about Salvation:
Catechism of the Ctaholic Church
161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. "Since "without faith it is impossible to please [God]" and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life 'But he who endures to the end.
1741 Liberation and salvation. By his glorious Cross Christ has won salvation for all men. He redeemed them from the sin that held them in bondage. "For freedom Christ has set us free." In him we have communion with the "truth that makes us free." The Holy Spirit has been given to us and, as the Apostle teaches, "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." Already we glory in the "liberty of the children of God."
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.
620 Our salvation flows from God's initiative of love for us, because "he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins" (1 Jn 4:10). "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Cor 5:19).
183 Faith is necessary for salvation. The Lord himself affirms: "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" (Mk 16:16).
1015 "The flesh is the hinge of salvation" (Tertullian, De res. 8, 2: PL 2, 852). We believe in God who is creator of the flesh; we believe in the Word made flesh in order to redeem the flesh; we believe in the resurrection of the flesh, the fulfillment of both the creation and the redemption of the flesh.
1864 "Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven." There are no limits to the mercy of God, but anyone who deliberately refuses to accept his mercy by repenting, rejects the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit. Such hardness of heart can lead to final impenitence and eternal loss.
1446 Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance for all sinful members of his Church: above all for those who, since Baptism, have fallen into grave sin, and have thus lost their baptismal grace and wounded ecclesial communion. It is to them that the sacrament of Penance offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification. The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament as "the second plank [of salvation] after the shipwreck which is the loss of grace."
I could go on and on but won't so if anyone is interested they can go to- http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
This website has a search engine so that you can look up things in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I do say a word of caution the Catholic Faith is very complicated in terminology so before jumping to conclusions please research, research, research.
Great places to start are
http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/index2.htm
http://www.catholic.com/
Hope this helps!
And once again cross-posting my response to Carrie's latest
----
Actually, Carrie, I was asking everyone a question. So far you're the only one who's been answering. Thank you for doing that. I'll take any one else's answers too, I want to be really clear on thses points.
Just to make sure I have this right:
1) The Catholic Bible and the Christian Bible are two completely different things.
2) The Christ the Christians pray to and worship and the Christ the Catholics pray to and worship are two completely different deities or gods.
3) The readings in the Catholic mass are not from the bible.
4) Since no one is reading from a Christian Bible, mass isn't really worship.
I'm not trying to change your mind or sway your faith, I just want to be clear on these points. Thanks again.
Elena,
Is that right, Elena? Hey, let me say THANKS FOR YOUR BLOG!.
I read Ask Sister Mary Martha all the time and I saw a comment there someone had left referencing the SISTER CHARLOTTE nonsense posted on that Candy's blog. So, naturally I had to check it out. Holy cow! That was all she wrote for me. I am sooooo tired of all this nonsense. So, I thought to myself, "well, I'll just start my own little blog and say what I think about all these people who seem to feel that they are expert enough in Catholic doctrine to publicly make horses hind ends of themselves attempting to point out the "fallacies." I had tried to post comments on her site three times asking very nicely for her to legitimate that "testimony" or remove it. She's obviously never heard of the sins of detraction, calumny, scandal.... Anyway, when I read some of the comments, somebody kept referring to "Elena's blog" so, I had to track you down.
Amen and Alleluia! Keep up the great work. Come see me sometime but, don't be too hard on me. I'm Catholic but, I'm no apologist!
I couldn't help myself, I also responded to Carrie's rude comments. I doubt my comment will be published on Candy's blog but I saved it:
Carrie,
I am Catholic and I do worship the one true God. I also obey him by obeying those He placed in authority in His Church. I don't have idols in my home, I have pictures, figures, statues, and icons to remind me of my heavenly family, the "cloud of witnesses" who lived exemplary lives because they loved, followed, and obeyed Jesus Christ. I suppose you have no pictures of your family members and friends in your home? We have crucifixes because remember, Paul said, "We preach Christ crucified" - there is no resurrection without the crucifixion. I never want to forget the pain, suffering, and agony that Jesus went through for me, for the whole world.
It is quite presumptuous of you to say that Catholics have never "cracked open" a Bible. I was raised in a "Bible church" and heard the Bible preached 3 times a week, Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night. I went to Sunday school every week, memorized Bible verses (KJV!), and did "Bible sword drills." My mom sat on my bed every night and read the Bible, read me Bible stories, and taught me to pray. I *know* the Bible. I converted to Catholicism 2 years ago after intense study of Catholic doctrine and church history. I hear more Scripture during mass than I ever heard in my Bible church. Just because *you* don't approve of the Catholic Bible doesn't mean it's not the Bible. In fact, I don't approve of the KJV. It's known to have many errors; I know of many Protestants who won't read it for that very reason.
Why do Catholics "flock" here? Because we are astounded at the misrepresentations about Catholicism that are continually posted here and we want to get the truth out. It is OK to disagree - I have nothing against agreeing to disagree. I'm not trying to convert anyone to the Catholic church or change anyone's mind about their faith, but I *do* want people to know the truth about what the Catholic church teaches, not a bunch of fantastical lies. To purposely misrepresent the Catholic church is just completely wrong.
I hope you don't mind if I post my as-yet-unpublished comment to Candy's blog on here:
Candy, I have a question for you. You say you post all this stuff about Catholicism because you want to "warn" Catholics, you want them to "get saved". As you wrote: "I REFUSE to let RC's, JW's and others flail in an incorrect view of Christianity."
So tell me this: do you really think you're getting through to Catholics this way? Do you really believe that you're convincing Catholics by posting a garbled rant about the supposed similarities in symbolism between Catholicism and paganism, followed by an even more garbled rant by an “ex-nun” (which reads like Maria Monk crossed with the Marquis de Sade)? Do you think Catholics will read this stuff and go, “Gosh, Candy’s right – I’ve seen the light!” They won’t and they’re not, you know. How ever good your intentions may be, and how ever much you protest you're doing this lovingly, you just come across as being rabidly anti-Catholic.
I’m not Catholic, although I used to be and some times I go to Mass. I'm a newly-converted Quaker. I came to your site for the organisational tips, but I’m not coming back any more.
May God’s peace be on you.
Eugenie
I don't know what doomed my comment to cyber-hell. May be it was the use of the word "rabidly" or may be "garbled rant". Or may be the mention of the Marquis de Sade did it.
Any way, what ever she's trying to do, it's having the opposite effect on me: I find myself wanting to go back to Mass.
God's peace,
Eugenie
did any of you notice the link someone posted at her blog? Notice how defensive the person is who is being questioned about Charlotte's testimony. He is overly defensive which leads me to believe he knows that it is untrue. People who have the truth have nothing to hide.
http://www.therighttobewrong.net/reckart.html
Forgot to mention the person's father was friends with Charlotte Wells.
Blondie,
Welcome home! Good posts!
Let me follow up on what Eugenie said about Candy's intent.
People spread all kinds of lies about Catholic doctrine under the guise of warning Catholics when their motives are so transparent to Catholics. How could you expect any well-catechised Catholic to believe that nonsense. We know it to be completely untrue. The true motivation behind that kind of "warning" is to blaspheme and cause scandal. It will win no converts from among Catholics faithful to the magisterium.
The Catholic Church is the one true church. It is the first Christian church, THE Church founded by Jesus Christ. The Catholic Bible is the true Bible. It contains the whole of Sacred Scripture. It's been neither "added to or taken away from" like protestant translations have. The Sacrifice of the Mass is the highest form of worship of Jesus Christ and His death and resurrection for our salvation. It is entirely "scriptural."
Listen, being a Catholic is not easy. We can't just say, "I'm saved" and think we're golden. It does not work that way, people.
Bethany said, "Notice how defensive the person is who is being questioned about Charlotte's testimony. He is overly defensive which leads me to believe he knows that it is untrue. People who have the truth have nothing to hide."
But I would say that all the defensiveness found on this blog would point to the same 'truth' about Catholicism. Just take out the words "Charlotte's testimony" and put in "Catholicism":
"Notice how defensive the person is who is being questioned about [Catholicism]. He is overly defensive which leads me to believe he knows that it is untrue. People who have the truth have nothing to hide."
There's defensive and the there is defending. Big difference. This blog is about defending the misrepresentations of the Catholic faith, not being defensive aboutit.
But I would say that all the defensiveness found on this blog would point to the same 'truth' about Catholicism. Just take out the words "Charlotte's testimony" and put in "Catholicism":
I understand what you're saying, MomofMany, but I think you may have misunderstood what I meant.
I agree, and think it's a good thing to defend what you believe in. That is why I will always defend myself if someone publicly says something derogatory about my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ....
but there's a difference in that, and what this pastor is doing in these emails. I don't know if you read them or not, but the first email that was sent to the man was not accusatory at all, not in the least.
This was a freelance journalist, simply asking the pastor if he had any information on Charlotte Wells Story. If you'll read it, you'll see she did nothing to even imply accusation towards him or Charlotte Wells. She was simply seeking more information.
However, you'll notice in his response, he is already angry, he accuses her of trying to deceive him, he accuses her of attacking Charlotte Wells, and accuses her of not even being interested in investigating the Catholic Church as well, which he couldn't have possibly known from her email.
That's different than a situation where person A publicly posts a likely false accusation against a Church, and then person B posts a defense of that statement.
Does that make sense the way I worded it?
Let me clarify a little more because I don't know if I made enough sense.
Suppose Candy made a post what a Catholic actually believes, and then refuting it, using the Bible. Let's take Mary's virginity for instance. And I am hoping I am correct....I have spoken to some Catholics who have said they believe Mary was always a virgin, even after Jesus was born. But I don't know if that is common to all catholics or not.
But just for the sake of explaining this to you, here is an example of what she could do in this situation.
She could post Bible verses, such as the ones that show that James and John were Jesus brothers, and this verse: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. AND she could allow others to comment without censoring them, and she would take the time to respond to all of their comments using the Bible.
This would be an excellent way to start a debate or to use the Bible to share her beliefs and the Gospel.
But the way that I have seen Candy make the same argument, would be along the lines of something like this:
"A nun shares her story of how she was molested and then tortured by someone who believed in the eternal virginity of Mary."
I know that's not the best example, but you can probably see what I mean. Do you see what I'm getting at?
It's not that I disagree with Candy's stance necessarily, but the way she gets it across. She is trying to lead people with deception rather than by just speaking the truth. If she is going to make a claim about a nun, she really should make sure it has some kind of evidence to back it up. Even you posted more evidence than she did, when you posted those reputable articles. (of course, they don't represent the majority of catholics, I'm sure!)
Also, she is censoring the opposition, so that others who would defend themselves cannot. And if she is telling the truth, there should be nothing to hide.
instead of lying to people to scare them away from Catholic traditions and rituals, she should be sharing with them from the Bible, and show them how her views are Biblically correct, rather than making up stories to get her point across. It only makes her appear deceitful. Maybe she means well, but it's hard to tell.
I hope you understand what I am saying.
I understand what you mean about wanting more evidence. However, I don't think that would be Candy's responsibility. She did not write the story. When you read an article, the author is the one who gives the evidences, cites materials used, etc. There are so many articles and stories that are listed on blogs, mine for example, that do not include my own checking of the references the author claims to have used. I do not make it common practice to check people's footnotes unless I am interested in more information.
There is a certain degree of having to trust what someone says, not because they can prove it, but because they say it is true. Christianity is one of the first places this rule applies, as we cannot 'prove' a great deal of what we believe. That is why faith is such an essential part of our teachings. We have to believe it even when it cannot be proven.
This is a bit different when we talk about the word of man, and I do not take the word of man as authoritative in any way. Every single thing a man says can be interpreted as 'false' because we see life through selfish, sinful eyes. Two people in an argument always believe they are in the right. That is why these things cannot be categorized as true and false.
As I stated before, I will never know if the testimony is true. I have found a lot of similar stories reported from the same time period, and current stories to back up the possibility that the church will act in criminal ways to protect itself. Like the author of the emails, I have been more inclined to believe her than disbelieve her based on what I read. But the absolute refusal by any Catholics I have read here to give these happenings any possibility makes me wonder all the more how they can be so adamantly sure. And if the church hounded this woman and her friends, they have just cause to be suspicious and protective of any identifying information. We don't know the whole story. And I still make no claim as to its accuracy.
Yes, there is a difference between defending and defensiveness, but they are both present here. You cannot in all honesty tell me that nothing Elena ever posted crossed the line of personal attack and insult. And it stemmed from the opinion of someone else that she was wrong. That is defensiveness. She may have some very good points. But I can't hear them through the sarcasm, anger, and disdain.
Mother of Many,
Candy should provide proof for that ridiculous tale as it is malicious, scandalous and mere gossip to hurt a faith that she obviously know almost nothing about. Putting up a tale such as that is gossip plain and simple. It is even made worse because it is done with ill-intent.
As mere sinful people we all get defensive at some point. Especially when we feel impotent as when Candy does not allow Catholics to make a comment on her blog to defend our faith. I have become so angry at the things posted on her blog that my husband asked me to stop going there. I have to have lots of control to not say what I would really like to say as they would be hurtful not helpful.
I have to wonder why Candy insists on posting anti-Catholic rhetoric, stirs up a hornet’s nest and sits back and watches.
And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 31Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. 32Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.
Ephesians 30-32
Well, so far my last round of questions has yet to come up. I'd still like to know what the non-catholic/christian ladies have as answers for those questions. I really would.
I understand what you mean about wanting more evidence. However, I don't think that would be Candy's responsibility.
I disagree....I think that this is very much her responsibility.
She did not write the story.
I realize she did not write the story, and I realize she may have believed it to be true. However, with such serious allegations against a church, don't you think that she has a responsibility to find out before she posts it publicly, making it as though this is some kind of common practice for Catholics?
Don't you think if you publicly post something (which is possible to be proved or disproved) that you have somewhat of an obligation to back your claims up with some kind of evidence?
Amy, suppose I were to put out this article:
Testimony of an ex-Baptist born again Christian:
..... I was locked in a cold room, and there I had unspeakable tortures brought upon my body, so much that I tremble just thinking about it. The Baptist preacher that I had admired so much, told me that this was the way that you come to Christ. He told me that first, you must suffer for His sake. That "in order to gain life you must be willing to lose it". So even though I was screaming for mercy, this Baptist preacher just kept whipping and flogging me, until I could barely stand, and He kept repeating, "repent! Repent, sinner!" I cried and cried, but I felt at the time that this was what I must do to be saved.....
Now, Amy, if I posted something like this (I'm sure there's something out there equally ridiculous for people of protestant religions) on my blog, would you not say, "Wait a minute! That sounds made up...don't you think you need to check and see whether that is unproven before posting such a thing?"
But you don't even seem to see why this would be a problem?
When you read an article, the author is the one who gives the evidences, cites materials used, etc.
Exactly...and there were none on Charlotte's testimony, even from the original websites where they came from.
There are so many articles and stories that are listed on blogs, mine for example, that do not include my own checking of the references the author claims to have used.
Most of them don't make such drastic claims that it would matter though, do they?
I do not make it common practice to check people's footnotes unless I am interested in more information.
Well, there are very many people interested in more information on this story, aren't there? So doesn't Candy have a responsibility to make sure that these kinds of allegations are backed up with just the tiniest shred of evidence?
There is a certain degree of having to trust what someone says, not because they can prove it, but because they say it is true.
I agree in some cases. However, in this case, it doesn't apply because the allegations are so severe and outrageous, and if untrue, is hurting MANY innocent people by this horrible being broadcast over and over to people who don't know any better. It is causing hatred for people, and it is not profitable to anyone, if untrue. Even if it is true, do you think it speaks for the majority of Catholics?
Do you like it when people use extreme cases of violence by some bad person to try to portray how you personally feel....generalizing? Like, for instance, don't you get annoyed with the people who claim ALL pro-lifers would love to bomb abortion clinics, just because there have been a few crazies out there who did that. See my point?
As far as I have known, if it weren't for the Catholics, there wouldn't be much of a pro-life movement ....Most- well I guess all-Catholics are appalled by abortion. This is actually the reason that I have come to know many Catholics and have learned of their love for Jesus. Because I frequently debate pro-life issues and many of the people I debate with are Catholic.
So my point there is, this idea of Catholics throwing babies into a pit to die seems really far fetched, and I would HAVE to see some evidence before I could take that kind of thing as even slightly true. And I think it is horrible to throw that kind of thing out there without having an inkling whether it is true or not.
Christianity is one of the first places this rule applies, as we cannot 'prove' a great deal of what we believe. That is why faith is such an essential part of our teachings. We have to believe it even when it cannot be proven.
That is comparing apples to oranges. Actually, it's not even comparable. You're comparing the word of people to the word of God.
We do believe it is God's word by faith, but we do not have to believe Charlotte's testimony is real by faith. What does the Bible say about being a false witness? It is wrong to make accusations about others without knowing first whether it is true or not. Don't you agree?
This is a bit different when we talk about the word of man, and I do not take the word of man as authoritative in any way.
Okay, I didn't read this part before I responded above.
Every single thing a man says can be interpreted as 'false' because we see life through selfish, sinful eyes. Two people in an argument always believe they are in the right. That is why these things cannot be categorized as true and false.
But this isn't just someone saying, "Oh the world is beautiful because God created it that way." It's not something that isn't harmful. This testimony of Charlotte, if not true, is extremely harmful to many, many people, and when we make accusations against people we must strive not to make false ones.
As I stated before, I will never know if the testimony is true. I have found a lot of similar stories reported from the same time period, and current stories to back up the possibility that the church will act in criminal ways to protect itself.
Does that mean that the majority are this way? This is a pretty strong accusation to make without some kind of statistical evidence. There are a LOT of Catholics in the world, versus a very small minority of them who were caught doing those horrible things. Just like in ANY church, there will be a percentage of them who don't adhere to the teachings of the Bible. It's inevitable!
I know people in my very own church who committed adultery. Actually, the pastor of a Southern Baptist church of a friend I know had molested her as a child. And wasn't there some preacher named Ted Haggardy who was caught doing all sorts of horrible things?
So the thing is, there are evil people all over the place. Being in a Catholic church doesn't always necessarily make you catholic, as being in a church doesn't always make you a Christian. There has to be a heart change in there, don't you agree?
To imply that the majority of Catholics do these unspeakable acts just because of one woman's testimony is just plain wrong.
Okay, I have written a book here...I gotta run...baby needs a diaper change. :) Hope I didn't make too many typos.
Erika, you said it so much better than I did.
I am not implying that the majority of Catholics do this. Nor do I see any statement in Charlotte's testimony or Candy's reprinting of it that says such. But just like the stories of priest molestation, there is a tendency for a common occurence because of a certain set of circumstances. The first whistle-blowers there were also not believed. The major difference is the cultural climate in which we live, where nothing is considered taboo to disclose anymore. Also, if the 'witnesses' were being kept prisoner until death, we couldn't expect many witnesses (though there are several stories out there from this period in time).
I agree with your assessment that I don't see a story about Baptist abuse as being a problem. No story published in the newspaper, blogland, or anywhere else changes the truth. If I flew into a panic over it, it would signal that I did have doubts about my own church and felt threatened by what may be found to be true. I would think anyone reading such an article would realize that was not the way of salvation in a baptist church, just as no one is saying all convents are hell holes. BUT that is precisely why we need to find our answers to what God wants of us in His Word and not from the traditions and interpretation of man! If we rely on man, we are really opening ourselves up to lies and deception. If sister Charlotte had only Bible instruction and never attended mass, she would have never accepted the idea that suffering for someone else can take away their punishments. Only perfect blood can do that. There is the real lesson in this testimony for me.
Saying all Pro-Lifers would love to bomb an abortion clinic does not make me mad at all. Most intelligent people are aware of generalizations and do not accept them as categorically true. Also, a friend once said if something makes you mad, you need to seriously consider why. If I call you a kangaroo, would it make you mad? No, because you know you are not a kangaroo.
Molestation, murder, etc. have and do happen in the fundamentalist world as well, as I stated. That has no bearing on the veracity of this testimony, however. I would err on the side of caution and not call someone a liar just because I did not have proof. You stated,
"..when we make accusations against people we must strive not to make false ones."
but I think you have just backed up MY point that you cannot determine whether her story is true or not, yet the entire debate here is because the Catholic readers are 100% sure it is a lie.
Now, Amy, if I posted something like this (I'm sure there's something out there equally ridiculous for people of protestant religions) on my blog, would you not say, "Wait a minute! That sounds made up...don't you think you need to check and see whether that is unproven before posting such a thing?"
Actually, I can't say that I have ever seen anything in Catholic circles that corresponds to this type of anti-Catholic story. Maybe if you go back to when we were burning heretics, but definitely not in the modern age.
As far as I have known, if it weren't for the Catholics, there wouldn't be much of a pro-life movement ....Most- well I guess all-Catholics are appalled by abortion.
But that being said, I do have to 'fess up that there are plenty of pro-choice Catholics. Elena and I are representing the "faithful Catholic." There are lots of Catholics, even lots of ageing ex-hippy nuns, who are active in the pro-choice movement. Just look at *sigh* John Kerry, that "devout" Catholic who was an altar boy.
I would agree that there are plenty of actual news stories out there of real Catholics doing not great things, if you want to make that sort of point. I think Candy would be better served to stick with those. Using fiction just weakens her case.
just as no one is saying all convents are hell holes.
Actually, Sister Charlotte presents this as how all convents are. She consistently uses phrases such as "everyone knows" and "all the little sisters." That's part of what makes it so unbelievable.
I understood her to say that the cloistered nuns were the ones in danger for the very reason that no one could check on them.
"The Lord laid the burden upon my heart to give this testimony that others might know what cloistered convents are."
"At that time I thought of being a sister of the open order, but as I went on into this, up until the time I took my white veil, sixteen and a half years of age, everything was beautiful. I really didn’t have any fear in my heart whatsoever."
But that being said, I do have to 'fess up that there are plenty of pro-choice Catholics. Elena and I are representing the "faithful Catholic." There are lots of Catholics, even lots of ageing ex-hippy nuns, who are active in the pro-choice movement. Just look at *sigh* John Kerry, that "devout" Catholic who was an altar boy.
Yeah but I don't believe they are Christians in their heart. I think that their faith is a sham.
Also, I heard from another Catholic friend of mine that you absolutely cannot be Catholic and pro-choice. It goes against the vatican or something. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I am totally clueless. I'm just repeating what I heard. I have seen bumper stickers to buy (from a pro-life catalog) that say "You can't be Catholic and pro-choice". From what I heard, you can actually be refused to partake in the Lords Supper if you have these kinds of beliefs....that's just what I heard, I dont know for sure.
I remember seeing on Hannity and Colmes that Hannity had asked Frank Pavone if he would deny him communion based on his belief that birth control pills were okay, and Frank Pavone said yes. And I am not sure of the significance of that, but Hannity looked very shocked. So it must mean something.
momofmany,
You may have understood it that it was supposed to be a rare event, but many of her commenters seemed to believe that it was much more common:
Thank you so much for sharing this amazing testimony! I sat right here and read every last word and feel so challenged to reach out more aggresively to my Catholic friends who are so lost! I'm feeling so spoiled to have been raised in a Bible believing home where I was taught the love of God and the freedom of salvation! I'm also reminded that because much has been given me, much will be required. Thank you for the challenge to be bold in my witness to others and to pour my heart out for these precious nuns! Thank you so much for taking the time to share this with us.
This testimony has just torn at my heart. I had no idea. I have always thought of nuns as people to respect and revere. Thank you for sharing this. I have so many catholic friends who are lost in this web. Bless you! ~Holly
Thanks for sharing this amazing testimony, I never realized the extent of it all.
I've spent all morning reading this in between caring for the kids. I am heartbroken and outraged. Does this really go on? It couldn't, could it??! Why on earth can the government come in and intrude on families and take their children away, but yet this goes on all over the place in these convents?? How can it be? Oh I hope this doesn't really happen. How could this kind of torture be so widespread and allowed?? What can we do about it, to make sure it's exposed, if it really does happen?
There are simply no words. I just pray this can't be true. But unfortunatly, there is evil in this world that just as she said, we can't possibly even imagine. Oh Lord, come quickly!
Yeah but I don't believe they are Christians in their heart. I think that their faith is a sham.
I do too, but it would be dishonest of me to give the impression that all Catholics are unified on the matters. I pray more for "cafeteria Catholics" as we call them, than I do for sincere protestants. Probably because my family is full of less than stellar Catholics.
I totally understand, Kelly!
Post a Comment