Where Catholicism Goes To Die

political_correctness

Zero tolerance for less than catholic behavior”

These words run at the top of the top post pretty much at the very top of “Catholic (wrong) Answers”. Small “c” in the original.

In case any of my readers would not know what kind of shop this is, you can read more here.

The explanation for this Giuliani-style attitude runs as follows:

Insulting Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, Orthodoxy or any other faith is a behavior in conflict with the Magisterium. The Magisterium has not given anyone license to speak for Catholicism in any manner other than charitably and respectfully. Therefore, any form of speech that is not in keeping with the form of speech used by the Magisterium cannot be tolerated as morally upright, even if one is defending truth. How others speak about Catholics does not mitigate our moral responsibility.

Let us see some concrete examples of wrong behaviour, then:

“… there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, 1434:

Is calling Islam the “abominable sect of Mahomet” “uncharitable” or “not respectful?”

If not, I will make a couple of blog post on the matter immediately. At Catholic (wrong) Answers, they will be happy indeed. Very charitable.

If yes, I am sorry, Your Holiness. You are banned. We have a zero tolerance policy for “less than catholic” behaviour here. You are a bad, bad Pope! Where's your moral responsibility?

“He (Mohammed) seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh urges us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected; he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity.

He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the Contrary, Mohammed said that he was sent in the power of his arms – which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning (1). Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Mohammed forced others to become his follower’s by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimony of the Old and the New Testaments by making them into a fabrication of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place faith in his words believe foolishly.”- St. Thomas Aquinas: Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 1, Chapter 16, Art. 4.

“Doctrine of the greatest falsity”. May I say this, Miss?

“Brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching”. Charitable?

“[Mohammed] perverts […] the Old and the New Testaments”. How does this square with the Magisterium, Miss? I thought St Thomas was good at it?

Oops. Sorry, Miss… My bad. Apologies. Please allow me to make amends…

Shame on you, Thomas boy! Dumb Ox, you! Any form of speech that is not in keeping with the form of speech used by the Magisterium cannot be tolerated as morally upright, even if one is defending truth. Didn't you know it? (Is it good so, Miss?).

There is also the superstition of the Ishmaelites which to this day prevails and keeps people in error, being a forerunner of the Antichrist.

St John of Damascus.

I say! Watch your mouth! “Superstition”? “Forerunner of the Antichrist?” Haven't you read Evangelii Gaudium, man? The Magisterium has not given anyone license to speak for Catholicism in any manner other than charitably and respectfully!

———–

Well, I could go on.

You get the gist.

St. Thomas Aquinas, St John of Damascus, Pope Eugene IV and countless others are (cough…) not allowed to post on “c”atholic answers, the place where Catholicism goes to die.

Zero tolerance, and all that.

Beware of sanctimonious, pansy “c”atholics.

They are the bitchiest of them all. But only with Catholics, with the capital “c”.

Mundabor

 

Posted on March 17, 2014, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 10 Comments.

  1. CA was started to defend the Catholic Faith from the smears, lies, and falsehood taught by American Protestant fundamentalists. It’s main purpose these days seems to be defending the Catholic establishment from just criticisms from Catholic lay people who won’t pretend that all is right in the Church.

  2. Wow! I never knew that the Father of The Church, Saint John Chrysostom, is in conflict with the Magisterium with his famous “Eight Homilies Against the Jews”!

    Quote wiki:
    During his first two years as a presbyter in Antioch (386-387), John denounced Jews and Judaizing Christians in a series of eight homilies delivered to Christians in his congregation who were taking part in Jewish festivals and other Jewish observances.

    “Judaizing Christians?” Is St, John Chrysostom (BTW called the “Goldmouth”) talking about Pope Francis who treated a Jewish delegation from his native Argentina to a private lunch catered by one of Rome’s top kosher restaurants on “the Day of Judaism”?

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/pope-treats-argentine-delegation-to-kosher-roman-delights/

  3. The best thing ,if all this isn’t a bad joke of some infiltrated Proddies,is that Catholic Answers immediately blacklist all uncharitable Catholic Churchmen ,theologians and writers of all times, beginning from Saint Paul ,going on with Dante , ending with Congar , and censor the insults that week in week out are at present ready for those four traditionalist scalzacani still living on the face of the Earth.

    • oh, I wouldn’t be very tender with Congar myself, if he were still alive. But you want to say they do not censor the insults against the traditionalists?

      M

  4. felicitasperpetua

    Politeness among the PC-ers? My foot! In my experience, PC junkies are the most disgusting, servile masochistic worms when confronted by terrorists, criminals, heretics and similar sorts of deviants. Their inherent nastiness and boorishness only comes out to abuse anything that’s normal and decent.
    As to “Catholic?answers”, they ought to change their name to “Deluded people who believe themselves to be Catholic, giving advice as though they were experts”.

  5. Right on the money. NewChurch™ wouldn’t dare use the bully tactics with heretics, Muslims, Jews, or atheists, that they use with anyone trying to stick to the Faith. They like to make a big public show, too, of whipping a good Catholic, always glancing over their shoulder for approval in taking down someone who has ‘doctrinal security’. What a lio.

  6. About 8 years ago I was on the Catholic Answers blogs. A woman was trying to discern what faith to become a member of. I told her that the Catholic faith holds all of the truths and that the rest of the protestant religions just make it up as they go along. I was attacked by all sides. The response that I have never forgotten is the protestant minister who told me that that was the most “uncharitable” response he had ever heard. All of the other faux catholics came in to slam me. How dare I speak the truth. Needless to say I picked up that something wasn’t right with Catholic Politicially Correct Answers.

%d bloggers like this: