At this point, you need to make a decision. You need to leave the Church for good (a path that I am NOT recommending) or you need to swallow your pride and admit that you were wrong. It’s very, very clear that njr and I are right on this issue of the Catholic Faith, and it’s also clear that you are propagating heretical opinions.

You can pretend like we are just wrong. If you like, you can so delude yourself. But ultimately, you are clearly wrong. The bottom line is that not just any view can be acceptable to any given organization, and the Catholic Church is no different. I can accurately call you un-Catholic based on the views you’ve expressed, because you have expressed views that run counter to the teachings of the Church. It’s really that simple.

I’ve never been able to understand why leftists insist on remaining “in” the Catholic Church. I mean, they must realize at some point that they don’t agree with the Church on crucial issues. Maybe it’s because being a Catholic is part of the Irish-American/Irish-Catholic identity which has been so romanticized in Hollywood. All I know, though, is that Catholics really need to start learning their Faith and not simply going through life as an atheist would.

“X. ERRORS HAVING REFERENCE TO MODERN LIBERALISM

“77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. — Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855.

“78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. — Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

“79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

“80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” March 18, 1861.”

Now remember, this is a syllabus of errors, so these statements are actually being unequivocally CONDEMNED, even though, at first glance, they may appear to be supported.

Source: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

So, Domenic, do you have any LEGITIMATE sources that can contradict this?

Yeah, you just think that you know more than Aquinas, Augustine and the teaching authority of the Magisterium.

When did accusing someone of an ad hominem attack become an ad hominem attack? Once again, I’ll ask for a quote, or some evidence as to my apparent “ad hominem attack”

“Since you can’t prove you know anything more than I do on a forum, you can’t possibly be doing anything except the former.”

You choose to ignore and reject basic Catholic teachings. Either that is a willful denial on your part, or you simply do not know that you are in conflict with Catholic teaching. You are the one who refused to address our main points.

We haven’t used Catholicism and culture interchangeably. That’s your interpretation of what we’ve said, but we’ve also denied that the two terms are synonymous.

““If I’m right about the Catholic Faith, then agreement with me would be a measure of how good a given Catholic is, now wouldn’t it?”

Problem is, you aren’t. You just assume you are.”

Domenic,

We provide sources, and authorities on the faith to back up our beliefs. You source being raised in a plurality of religion, which, by definition, denies one of the Four marks of the Catholic Church. Namely “One” of One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. Just with that, you cannot be Catholic. Unless, of course, plurality of religion has changed since my high school “religion” class.

“No one I’m going to bring up is going to meet that mark to you. Apparently the Pope wasn’t good enough for your friend.”

You’re right. Because being a leftist and believing in the teachings of the Catholic Church is impossible. The two cannot be reconciled. Ever read the Syllabus of Errors? Leftist/modernist beliefs are basically listed there, and are condemned.

No, Catholicism is important to this discussion because I am arguing that France ought to remain a Catholic nation. Also, you are the one who mentioned that you were a “leftist-Catholic,” so it was really you who brought up the personal element of this “discussion,” if that’s what you want to call it at this point. I’m looking back at my posts before you joined, and I left my personal religious beliefs out of it. It wasn’t until you stupidly called yourself a “leftist-Catholic” that I started giving legitimate, concrete arguments which have pretty much demolished your “Catholic” perspective and shown you to be the kind of person that you are.

And for God’s sake, Domenic, are you still accusing me of using the terms “Catholicism” and “culture” interchangeably? You know, if you’re not even going to read what I write, then we might as well stop right here.

“Hey, I’m not the one who thinks I know the faith better than the Pope, a nun, and a monk. That’s your cheering section.”

I find it hilarious that you are hiding behind the clergy. I always thought that the Medievals were supposed to be the only people didn’t dare question what a reigning pope did or said, or what an individual monk or nun had to say. The difference between me and you, Domenic, is that I provide substantive arguments based on logical deduction based on information that I research. You, on the other hand, don’t know anything, and so you rely on one monk and one nun. And for as many problems as PJPII may have had, I can tell you that he’d agree with me a lot more often than he’d agree with you.

“ ‘You’ve suggested that France ought not to remain necessarily a Catholic nation, despite her rich Catholic history, heritage, tradition, and culture…’

“No, I haven’t. What I’ve done is echo the viewpoint of the original posting, which was “You cannot preserve a culture by building a fence of laws around it which abrogate personal liberty. ” I think that’s a fair hypothesis.”

Okay, Domenic. I’ll grant you that one. The problem is that you go on to say:

“Yeah, I do think Jews and Muslims have just as much of a right to practice their faith openly as I or anyone else does. You are the one who wants to ban them.”

There are several problems with this statement. First, that’s not what you originally said. You originally said:

“This whole time I’ve been valuing their way of life as one just as legitimate as mine.”

This is a blatantly un-Catholic idea. To consider a false religion “just as legitimate” as Roman Catholicism is tantamount to saying that Catholicism is no more true than any other religion, which is a HERESY. Even the Second Vatican Council would have considered that a heresy. THUS, if you really believe that, then you are NOT CATHOLIC. Again, if you don’t like that, then leave.

” ‘If I’m right about the Catholic Faith, then agreement with me would be a measure of how good a given Catholic is, now wouldn’t it?’

“Problem is, you aren’t. You just assume you are.”

I assume?!! njr and I are the only ones who have actually provided any substantive arguments!! I provided a very compelling quote from none other than one of the most influential Doctors of the Church, if not the most influential. You’ve provided an extremely vague example of a monk and a nun. If you want to argue the Catholic religion with me, you’d better come prepared.

“MY ad hominem attacks? Where have I tried to debase your argument by attacking YOU?”

Here’s one:

“Pope Matheson. Who is njr? Your personal Amen corner?”

This is blatant mockery.

“I can’t even take y’all seriously, not that I did much to begin with.”

This is debasement.

“I’ll tell everyone I know to confess to you instead of bothering a nominal Catholic priest.”

More mockery.

But here’s the thing, Domenic. I don’t hate you despite your vindictiveness. My only fear is that I’ve led you astray. Now, mind you, I don’t think I’ve led you astray with any of my expressed opinions. My fear stems from the fact that I am such a despised figure on UNC’s campus, and therefore no UNC bleeding heart will probably want to be associated with me or agree with me on anything. My hope originally was that more people would come to agree with me after they heard what I had to say, but my realization is that this is probably a vain hope.

I guess you just can’t have a discussion about Christianity without calling someone who disagrees with you un-Christian.

“…if you don’t like the Catholic Faith, then just leave it.”

Hey, I’m not the one who thinks I know the faith better than the Pope, a nun, and a monk. That’s your cheering section.

“You’ve suggested that France ought not to remain necessarily a Catholic nation, despite her rich Catholic history, heritage, tradition, and culture…”

No, I haven’t. What I’ve done is echo the viewpoint of the original posting, which was “You cannot preserve a culture by building a fence of laws around it which abrogate personal liberty. ” I think that’s a fair hypothesis.

“If I’m right about the Catholic Faith, then agreement with me would be a measure of how good a given Catholic is, now wouldn’t it?”

Problem is, you aren’t. You just assume you are.

Yeah, I do think Jews and Muslims have just as much of a right to practice their faith openly as I or anyone else does. You are the one who wants to ban them.

“To support your case that leftists can be good Catholics, you offer highly questionable individuals as examples of good Catholics, presumably because you can’t provide an example of a true-blue leftist who’s also a good Catholic.”

No one I’m going to bring up is going to meet that mark to you. Apparently the Pope wasn’t good enough for your friend.

MY ad hominem attacks? Where have I tried to debase your argument by attacking YOU? That’s an ad hominem. E.G. “Ralph said the car was green, but Ralph is a fucking idiot.” If it’s “but Ralph is colorblind”, that’s another story. Since you can’t prove you know anything more than I do on a forum, you can’t possibly be doing anything except the former.

It’s great to goad you about Epstein, because his little episode shows what lies behind the viewpoints your organization espouses. The dark underbelly is up for everyone to see, and you can’t stand it. The youth movement you hope to create will never be remembered as anything more than a Nativist backlash because of his drunken stupor. Ha, ha, ha. How’s the adviser search? Charles Martel had his hammer, but Epstein could only manage a stein.

I’ve deemed people as “un-Christian”? No, Domenic, I’ve only accused you of being a non Catholic, and I’m still convinced of that fact. Also, the fact that are not a Catholic doesn’t reflect on your ability and right to comment on Islam’s influence. I’d just suggest actually studying Catholic teachings before claiming to be a Catholic.

I reference my faith in order to win arguments? Give me a break. Oh, and quotes for that matter, as well.

I don’t compare people to myself when faced with the question of whether someone is Catholic, or not. I base it on Catholic teaching. If you hold ideas that are contrary to Catholic teaching, then you are not Catholic. It’s pretty simple. This isn’t a matter of my interpretation versus yours. This is a matter of you disagreeing with Church teaching.

Sister Helen disagrees with both Aquinas and Augustine, with regards to the death penalty. Canon law stated that capital punishment was reserved for the state, but didn’t condemn it. The Church doesn’t have an official teaching on the death penalty. However, the Catholic Church has always officially supported the state’s right to defend and uphold the common good with capital punishment. Sister Helen is also a supporter of “liberation theology” a teaching that has been condemned by numerous popes in a variety of encyclicals. So, yes, I do question how much of a Catholic Prejean is.

I’m Riley’s what? I guess agreeing with someone is a crime these days.

“Pope Matheson. Who is njr? Your personal Amen corner?”

So, now that you can’t argue against either Riley’s points, or mine regarding Islam, you make an ad hominem attack. Wait. Didn’t you just accuse me of the same thing? Oh yeah, you didn’t provide evidence or quotes, while I did. Man, Domenic, you are certainly building your case. Red herrings, ad hominem attacks, ignoring our main points. You’re just doing a bang up job of arguing your point.

I think it’s about time for the typical leftist retreat. “You guys are just SO wrong that there isn’t even a point in disproving all your errors. You’re just crazy. I’m done with you.” Does that sound familiar to anyone here?

“The only way you have been able to defend yourself is to reference your faith, and deem everyone else un-Catholic or un-Christian who doesn’t agree with you.”

Hmm, Domenic. If I recall correctly, a discussion of Christianity/Catholicism is quite essential to this discussion. The last discussion I was involved in was the one about Liberty University, if I recall correctly. I think it’s pretty impossible to have that discussion without talking about Christianity. And it is my firm conviction that Christianity is essential to Western Civilization as we have traditionally known it. I’m sorry if this makes you uncomfortable, but it’s my position.

“You’ve done it on this blog before, and I don’t see how you can act like you go on engaging in some sort of respectful dialogue calling everyone un-Christian.”

I call it as I see it. As I said, Domenic, if you don’t like the Catholic Faith, then just leave it. I have concrete arguments for my positions. All you have are accusations that I’m a mean guy because I actually provide substantive arguments that you can’t refute. Typical of 97% of UNC students (and that’s being charitable).

“How much someone agrees with you is no measure of how Catholic they are, and a Catholic not having the same politics as you doesn’t make them a bad Catholic.”

If I’m right about the Catholic Faith, then agreement with me would be a measure of how good a given Catholic is, now wouldn’t it? I’m sorry, Domenic, that your experience of the Catholic Faith is so limited. Good Catholics are always admonishing one another. Ever heard of “admonishing the sinner?” Look it up.

“You can say how un-Catholic I am as much as you want, it doesn’t make your viewpoint any more certain.”

Again, Domenic, I’m going based on what you’ve written on this forum. I don’t know you otherwise. You’ve suggested that France ought not to remain necessarily a Catholic nation, despite her rich Catholic history, heritage, tradition, and culture, and despite the lengthy quote from St. Thomas Aquinas I provided suggesting that you’re wrong. I, therefore, don’t consider your opinion Catholic. You’ve said that Judaism is “just as legitimate” as Roman Catholicism. To support your case that leftists can be good Catholics, you offer highly questionable individuals as examples of good Catholics, presumably because you can’t provide an example of a true-blue leftist who’s also a good Catholic.

“I like bringing up Epstein because it’s funny, I can’t imagine the headache it must cause YWC nationally. Hm. Sucks.”

Yeah, funny to someone like you. I can assure you that I don’t consider this a laughing matter. But, go ahead. Revel in your glee. It doesn’t change the fact that you are intellectually dishonest for bringing it up.

Also, I suggest you take a look at some previous discussions I’ve had on this forum. Granted, I haven’t participated in many. But I did have a debate with Chris Jones (in which I was a bit of an ass, admittedly) in which we both stayed almost entirely off the topic of religion. When I was defending myself for dear life against the attacks of leftists during my time at UNC, I never referenced my religion, except for when I was asked about it directly–and even then I didn’t make serious or lengthy arguments based on Catholicism to support my views on America’s immigration problem. So don’t try to dismiss my arguments as nothing more than my “referencing my faith.”

I’m sorry that njr agrees with me. I’m sorry that I have ONE supporter. So who are you? Johnny Q’s Amen corner? Lay off your ad hominem attacks–it’s only proving to me further how weak your arguments are. To hear that from a leftist after how they (the leftists) treated Barack Obama is almost unbearable. YOU ALL were in the Amen corner of Obama. I’ll tell you one thing, Domenic, you are an exercise in patience.

The only way you have been able to defend yourself is to reference your faith, and deem everyone else un-Catholic or un-Christian who doesn’t agree with you. You’ve done it on this blog before, and I don’t see how you can act like you go on engaging in some sort of respectful dialogue calling everyone un-Christian. How much someone agrees with you is no measure of how Catholic they are, and a Catholic not having the same politics as you doesn’t make them a bad Catholic. You can say how un-Catholic I am as much as you want, it doesn’t make your viewpoint any more certain.

Being your brother doesn’t mean I have to agree with you, and what a shame it is for you to call me un-Catholic simply for not. How is Sister Helen a bad Catholic for being an anti-death penalty activist when that is the VATICAN’S position? But as you’ve already indicated, even the Pope knew less about Catholicism than you do. Pope Matheson. Who is njr? Your personal Amen corner?

I like bringing up Epstein because it’s funny, I can’t imagine the headache it must cause YWC nationally. Hm. Sucks.

Ahhh, the old math of Islam. Yep, you’re right. They were more advanced in terms of math. Too bad that while those mathematical discoveries were being made, Islam was rife with civil tension and war. And here’s the thing. They closed themselves up, as I’m sure you know. They didn’t let anything and hardly let anything out. So, while they made those discoveries, they didn’t share them with the rest of the world until West had basically caught up.

And yes you can separate the two. That’s why we refer to them as the East and the West. Obviously there is no “wall”, but you attribute an excessive amount of influence to the East. There’s a difference between contributing to, say, science or math, and influencing Western culture. I haven’t denied anything with regards to Islam’s advancements in math. I have, however, denied your claim that Islam heavily influenced Western culture. A claim, I might add, that you have yet to prove, beyond citing clothing an the presence of an expression of hope.

Domenic,

Do you always take every word said by a politician word for word? Because politicians ALWAYS mean exactly what they say. I guess politicians are just popular lecturers to you. Reading between the lines isn’t one of your strong points, obviously.

Also, do you have the ability to argue without using a red herring? Your teachers must HATE your papers if your arguing style is any indication of your writing style. They’re called logical fallacies, in case you didn’t know, and about 99% of the time indicate that the person making the argument doesn’t have a response. It’s always interesting that leftist are so quick to just “give up” because we’re so “crazy”. Johnny is basically an anarchist, and I still address his arguments, although he is obviously beyond help. As a Catholic who more than likely has had social justice crammed down your throat for years, you should be trying to “teach” the “ignorant”. Oh wait. The “ignorant”, in this case, know far more about the Catholic Faith than you ever will.

Look, Domenic, I never said that you only need to tolerate Jews out of historical obligation. You need to tolerate them out of religious obligation. I, too, have Jewish friends. Aquinas was talking about tolerating their religious rites, which are (by real Catholic standards) false.

“This whole time I’ve been valuing their way of life as one just as legitimate as mine.”

What more do I need to say to prove that you aren’t a real Catholic? You view Judaism as a religion “just as legitimate” as Catholicism. While what you’re saying is the “noble” politically correct thing to say, it’s not at all a part of Catholic Church teaching. Look, Domenic, if you don’t agree with the Catholic Church, why do you stay in it?

“Tell Thomas Merton, Sister Helen Prejean, and Cesar Chavez that you can’t be a leftist-Catholic. Then again, they’re probably all closet Communists to you.”

If they’re leftists, they’re not good Catholics. Thomas Merton wasn’t exactly the poster boy monk, shall we say, and Sister Helen Prejean is a joke for a nun. Cesar Chavez is also a joke for a Catholic.

“My point is the West is not just Christianity, that those aren’t interchangeable terms. Neither are religion and culture. That’s what you don’t seem to get. But then again, I was raised with a plurality of religion, race, and culture in my life, so maybe that’s easier for me to accept.”

I never said that the West is “just Christianity.” I never said that “Christianity” and “Western Civilization” are interchangeable terms. I never said that religion and culture are the same thing, nor did I say that “religion” and “culture” are interchangeable terms. Learn to read (and comprehend what you read). I said that the West, as we’ve known it for the past 1500-2000, years is not imaginable without Christianity. I also said that Christianity has benefitted much from the faithfulness and talent of men in the West. I, having grown up in America, was also raised with a plurality of religion, race, and culture in my life (isn’t it funny how leftists always have to inject race into a discussion?), and yet I have a different view from yours. Your “experience” is no more valuable than mine. Indeed, maybe my experience is more valuable than yours, since I obviously know the Catholic Faith better than you know it. Perhaps you haven’t seen religion divide people. Perhaps the friends you had growing up put their politically correct, feel-good notion of “tolerance” in front of their religious beliefs, and therefore never experienced any real division. Of course, you would argue that that’s a good thing. But I would argue that your religious beliefs and your convictions should come before anything else.

To any tolerant/charitable person, it should be clear that I’m not saying that we haven’t gained anything from other cultures, including the cultures of Islam. Clearly, we have. But that doesn’t mean that we aren’t different from one another. Again, it would be one thing if France were experiencing a natural cultural shift. But she’s not. She’s experiencing a radical cultural shift, or, as I like to call it, a conquest.

If the Islamic cultures should come up with a valuable scientific advance, then I’d be more than happy to incorporate it into the Western World. Then, it would become a part of Western Civilization, even if it didn’t originate in the West. For that matter, if a Muslim cleric comes up with an idea that helps Christians know and understand an extant Christian doctrine, then I’ll take that, too. But when it comes to taking Islamic culture and transplanting it onto Catholic territory, I will never support that.

Take Japan. The Japanese have gained an incalculable lot from the West, yet they remain culturally distinct from the West, as they have every right to do. We invented cars, they, in the opinion of some, made them better. Although the Occident and the Orient bounce ideas off each other incessantly, we still remain separate and distinct.

Sorry, Domenic. Your arguments betray a huge amount of prejudice (and, no, not prejudice against a Muslim, but prejudice against a fellow Catholic, a guy who’s supposed to be your brother). And by the way, bringing up Marcus Epstein is a cowardly red herring.

“I can’t even take y’all seriously, not that I did much to begin with.”

Maybe that’s your problem. You had decided against us before you even engaged in this discussion. How enlightened of you.

Also, Domenic, I really can’t believe your lack of honesty and your bitterness. If you honestly can’t take us seriously, and if you honestly never took us seriously to begin with, then why on Earth did you ever take the time to converse with us? I’ll tell you why. You DID take us seriously, but then you ended up not being able to defend your arguments very well, so you brought up Marcus Epstein and the claim that we’re basically not worth your time anyway. Am I right?