The Lord's Supper.

[michael_legna]

Hello Tibby,

I am not trying be mean. Let that be known now ok?
I know everyone makes mistakes, thats a fact of life.
That quote you wanted is from "The Nazi Persecution of the Churches" by J. S. Conway, pgs. 25,26 and 162.

The Catholic Church was opposed in principle to the policies of Hitler and the Nazi Party?

The three big defenders of the Roman Catholic faith were Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco. All three had concordates with the Vatican. When the Nazi war machine swept through the Balkans on the way to attack Russia, Yugoslavia had become a Nazi occupied country. The Pope despised the Russian Orthodox members. They were called Serbains and they were
marked for death in Yugoslavia. They were giving one choice,
to convert to Catholicism or die. The communist party was created by the Vatican to destroy one of her greatest enemies, the Russian Orthodox Church. The communist had double-crossed the pope and refused to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church members and at last, Pope Pius XII had created a machine to do what the communists had failed to do, butcher every Orthodox Church member and their clergy.
The Catholic priests changed their robes for the uniforms of the dreaded Ustachi killer squads and led the most barbaric, brutal raids upon the people and practiced satanic torture never before known in this century. We are not talking 800 years ago. We are talking 1940.

The whore of Revelation showed her fangs, tore her enemies to shreds and clevery covered up her crime. All this is documented in many books, including Catholic Terror Today by Avro Manhattan.

next page.....

Stop just making claims from your supposed personal knowledge of the subject and provide some sources for these supposed concords and what they may have contained if in fact they did exist.  

Provide some proof of what you claim about the Pope's supposed relationship with the Russian Orthodox as they are far outside the mainstream understanding of anyone who is in or knows anything about the two Churches.

Provide an unbiased secular historian to support your fantasy stories about priests in uniform.

Or admit that you hate Catholics enough to spread lies about them without waiting for a shredd of substantiation.

[michael_legna]

I give up.  

Why give up if what you say is true?  Is it because he has been providing sources to back up his statements and you have been relying on us simply taking your word for it?

Just read history and you will know.

I suggest you read the history, but try reading it from an unbiased source.

Half of the stuff in the RCC is man-made and not in the Bible.

Is that exactly 50% or more or less?  Or is this just another one of your wild claims that you really have no support for?

I saw your posts about understanding the Catholic Church and began to develop a response to their lengthy set of erroneous representations of what the Church really teaches, but then when I looked to post some of it your threads seemed to be gone.

I will offer to discuss any point your want to pull out of them or any concern you have about the teachings of the Catholic Church and either show you where you misunderstand what the Church really teaches or that it is actually in agreement with what is taught in the scriptures.

I am waiting and I will not give up on you.

God's Word....every word is true, now put  the Bible against the RCC and you will see.

I have and I will in front of you with quotes and referenced sources.  It won't be like you have done - making claims from darkness with no support.

[michael_legna]

My ever-lovin'-word!  Can we get more biased?  Each portion posted here, though biased, is nonetheless based upon historical truth.  

Guess what - your saying there is historical truth in each of our posts doesn't mean it is so.  If someone wants to claim something about two organizations relationship in a derogatory fashion then they better be prepared to support it with unbiased references and no rely on it being common knowledge.  

Were there members of the Nazi elite that were Catholic?  Yes.  

That may or may not be true, but Tony was claiming much more than that - he was claiming that the Catholic elite sided with the Nazi's.

Did the Catholic church support the Nazi regime.  Initially, yes.  

I claim that is a Protestant lie and challenge you to prove it with an independent secular source or stop spreading it and the hatred it engenders.

[Allinall]

Ok.  Apparently you've missed the point.

Guess what - your saying there is historical truth in each of our posts doesn't mean it is so.  If someone wants to claim something about two organizations relationship in a derogatory fashion then they better be prepared to support it with unbiased references and no rely on it being common knowledge.  

Don't care.  Seriously!  Why is this such a big deal?  And did I ever claim to be the authoratative word of God?

That may or may not be true, but Tony was claiming much more than that - he was claiming that the Catholic elite sided with the Nazi's.

And did I ever once agree with Tony?

I claim that is a Protestant lie and challenge you to prove it with an independent secular source or stop spreading it and the hatred it engenders.

Don't have a source.  Heard it in a documentary on the History Channel once.  And I'm not spreading hatred.  My point was that at that point in history, the Catholic Church didn't know what the Nazi regime was intending to do.  Many of the German people did not know what the Nazi regime was doing.  Yes, they had inclination, but no hard facts.  The people chose to close their eyes.  The Catholic Church simply attempted to keep an inroad to a highly unstable political situation.  I'm not saying they were supporting the Nazi's.  I'm saying that in the end, we are all sinners.

[michael_legna]

Ok.  Apparently you've missed the point.

Maybe I did that is entirely possible but I still don't see it after this post.

That may or may not be true, but Tony was claiming much more than that - he was claiming that the Catholic elite sided with the Nazi's.

And did I ever once agree with Tony?

No but your attempt at mediation (at least that is how I took it) seemed to indicate that both sides had a point.  I don't agree at least Tony never supported his in any way approaching a proof.  So for you to indicate that there were elite nazi's who were Catholics appeared to be a support of his unsupportable claim, that in turn there were elite catholics who were practically nazis.

I claim that is a Protestant lie and challenge you to prove it with an independent secular source or stop spreading it and the hatred it engenders.

Don't have a source.  Heard it in a documentary on the History Channel once.  

Then you are going from memory and certainly should not be expressing it as a fact since your own memory may not be reliable and the source the history channel used may not be as good and reliabel as you once took it to be.

And I'm not spreading hatred.

Yes to spread unsupportable untruths about any group is spreading hatred.  If you had said that the Jews controlled the banking system in the world and so prevented certain people from getting loans, that would be spreading rumors.  If you went further and admitted you had no source for it but a vague recollection of somebody on a tv show once said something like that then you would not be sure it was even true yourself and to spread a lie about someone is to spread hatred.

My point was that at that point in history, the Catholic Church didn't know what the Nazi regime was intending to do.  Many of the German people did not know what the Nazi regime was doing.  Yes, they had inclination, but no hard facts.  The people chose to close their eyes.  The Catholic Church simply attempted to keep an inroad to a highly unstable political situation.  

That point did not come out and I will take your word for the fact that, that is what you intended.   Though even this claim is questionable as the Catholic Church came out very early against the Nazis.

I'm not saying they were supporting the Nazi's.

Oh but that is exactly what you said in your previous post.

You said - "Did the Catholic church support the Nazi regime.  Initially, yes."

But like I said once you explained it more fully I see what you intended and do not have as much a problem with your statements as I had initially.

[Allinall]

Michael, do you ever stop listening to yourself long enough to hear the other guy?  Why are you insisting that I am bashing the Catholic church?  All I said was that they attempted to not abandon their followers in Germany, and so kept the...

inroad to a highly unstable political situation.

Unless, of course, you propose that the Catholic Church would drop their followers like hotcakes in such a political environment to show their disagreement with that regime's idealogy...

Then you are going from memory and certainly should not be expressing it as a fact since your own memory may not be reliable and the source the history channel used may not be as good and reliabel as you once took it to be.

Forgive me.  Didn't realize we were in the process of reshaping history here...

Yes to spread unsupportable untruths about any group is spreading hatred.  If you had said that the Jews controlled the banking system in the world and so prevented certain people from getting loans, that would be spreading rumors.  If you went further and admitted you had no source for it but a vague recollection of somebody on a tv show once said something like that then you would not be sure it was even true yourself and to spread a lie about someone is to spread hatred.

So instead, I should swallow the Catholic side of things, as that is the only believable truth, and spread that alone?  BTW, I do take offense at your concept of my "spreading" hate.  Your opinion.  NOT[/b] fact.  You yourself said...

No but your attempt at mediation (at least that is how I took it) seemed to indicate that both sides had a point.

I attempted to mediate a ridiculous argument between proposed brothers in Christ.  And yes.  Both sides do have a point.  The problem is that both sides are so adamantly biased in their viewpoints that they see no other viewpoint.  "No Catholic could ever have been a Nazi!" "ALL Catholics helped stoke the ovens in Auschwitz!"  (Made those up...ok?)  Do you have any idea how biased you both sound? And in attempting to put this into perspective, I've been lumped in with the Catholic haters.  Again Michael, do you ever stop talking long enough to hear the other guy?  Because you have not heard me.  You've proceeded with your preconceived notion of what I'm saying.  You've heard neither what I've said, nor the demeanor in which they were said.

[michael_legna]

Michael, do you ever stop listening to yourself long enough to hear the other guy?  

Yes I do that is why I always quote the other individual and address my response to that quote.

Why are you insisting that I am bashing the Catholic church?  All I said was that they attempted to not abandon their followers in Germany, and so kept the...

inroad to a highly unstable political situation.

Because you are perpetuating untruths and refuse to document them with a source or else abandon them.

Unless, of course, you propose that the Catholic Church would drop their followers like hotcakes in such a political environment to show their disagreement with that regime's idealogy...

If you will note once you explained that was your intended meaning I said I did not have a problem with that.  But that is not how your post started out.

Then you are going from memory and certainly should not be expressing it as a fact since your own memory may not be reliable and the source the history channel used may not be as good and reliabel as you once took it to be.

Forgive me.  Didn't realize we were in the process of reshaping history here...

No the goal is not to reshape it, that is why when one accuses another of an historical misdeed we need to do more than rely on our memory.  Too many of the prejudices aroudn today originated from people generalizing from their memory or personal experience.

Yes to spread unsupportable untruths about any group is spreading hatred.  If you had said that the Jews controlled the banking system in the world and so prevented certain people from getting loans, that would be spreading rumors.  If you went further and admitted you had no source for it but a vague recollection of somebody on a tv show once said something like that then you would not be sure it was even true yourself and to spread a lie about someone is to spread hatred.

So instead, I should swallow the Catholic side of things, as that is the only believable truth, and spread that alone?  

No you should not repeat anything you cannot defend or support with unbiased references, like I did with the newsweek article and like Tony did not.

The old adage of if you have nothing intelligent to say keep your mouth shut so no one will know could easily be extended to if you have nothing verifiable to say then don't say anything.  That simple rule would prevent a world of prejudices from forming.

BTW, I do take offense at your concept of my "spreading" hate.  Your opinion.  NOT[/b] fact.

One of the first lessons in understanding prejudice is that those who are being prejudiced against get to decide when it is occurring.  You cannot rely on those doing the hating to ever recognize it or admit it.  So my and other Catholic's opinion makes it fact.

You yourself said...

No but your attempt at mediation (at least that is how I took it) seemed to indicate that both sides had a point.

I attempted to mediate a ridiculous argument between proposed brothers in Christ.  And yes.  Both sides do have a point.  

It is possible that the other side has a point but it is not a foregone conclusion.  Until Tony provides some proof (or you do for that matter) I am not willing to concede even that much, because you find that what you have conceded to in the past has a way of rearing its ugly head under a different form and stated differently and more viciously with the proviso that you can't possibly disagree as you have already accepted this as true.  That is why your hinting that elite nazis were Catholics tended to support Tony's claim that elite Catholics were nazis.  A slippery slope to be sure but still one to be avoided.

The problem is that both sides are so adamantly biased in their viewpoints that they see no other viewpoint.

I admit my bias that is why I never ask anyone to take my word for anything.  I always provide a source to back up my cliams.  Similarly if someone else provides a source to support their claim I will look at it and if it is unbiased and reliable I will see their side of the argument.  Tony not only didn't provide an unbiased source, nor a reliable source, he didn't provide a source at all.  So from my point of view their is no other side to the argument except one based on personal opinion, bias and hatred.

Do you have any idea how biased you both sound? And in attempting to put this into perspective, I've been lumped in with the Catholic haters.  

You were "lumped in" because you hold to an opinion that is derogatory toward the Church and admit you have no support for it.  That is the basis of all prejudice and prejudice is hatred.

Again Michael, do you ever stop talking long enough to hear the other guy?  Because you have not heard me.  You've proceeded with your preconceived notion of what I'm saying.  You've heard neither what I've said, nor the demeanor in which they were said.

I have heard what you said as is evidenced by my replies being directly aimed at specific quotes from your posts.  On the other hand your characterizations of me have not been based on any quotes from my posts, prefering instead to claim some underlying tone in my messages as proof of these characterizations without providing even examples of them.

Finally, I do grant that I may have missed the demeanor of your posts and am sorry for that (an I admitted it in a previous post which you seem to have conveniently forgotten) but it is often hard to get that from a written message.  But not all of your posts were about calming the disagreement, you weighed in with your own opinion in places and offered no more support for it than did Tony and by that you have affected the tone of your message to one side, the side that is antiCatholic without basis.  I hope you can see that as well as I can see the intended demeanor of your posts.

[Tibby]

I just don't see how a God fearing Christian can do the ones below:

the mass,
the veneration (of worship) of Mary,
when they throw away their rosaries and repent from claiming that Mary was free from original sin,
purgatory,
and when the priest of Rome concede to the priesthood of all believers etc...

My reply to most of waht you said would have be be "So... that doesn't prove one way or the other that they are CHristian" Now, with that last comment, you have provne your lake of knowledge of the Catholic Church. You see, the term "Priest" given to clergy is just that, a term. This doesn't mean the Laymen aren't part of the priesthood of believers. There are Clergy Priest, and layman, who still act as the holy priesthood of christ.

By the way, veneration and worship are to different things. Stop blowing thing our your nose and calling them facts. Have you ever bothers to ASK a Catholic about these things? Or does all your info come from anti-Catholic hate-mongers?

And serve God too.
Yeah we all sin. But once that person knows its wrong they shouldn't do it anymore. Yet the RCC has/still does those above. They still do it today. In plain view.

Ok, then I ask you one question. WHY? In a court of law, Motive isn’t required for conviction, but this is a logical debate, and logical dictate we draw motive for this. What reason would the Roman Catholic Have to following things that you claim go against the teachings of Christ? Doesn’t that strike you as a little odd? It seem kind of counter productive? Do you then they just make up things for the fun of it? DO you thiink the Pope sat around and said to his Cardenials:

"Hey guys, lets start saying the lord's supper is the body and blood of Christ, but you gotcha8 off the Protestants! And to make it worst, lets tell them we believe that we always thought this!"

I find it hard to believe they just made mass up because a few Bishops were board.

I suggest again that would talk to a few Catholics in a friendly setting before you run off and are running your mouth again. I’d be happy to explain it all on PM, if you would be willing to listen.  I’m sure your local Priest would be more then happy to set a date with you and talk about the RCC, and about the issue you have about it. Get both sides.

[Ambassador4Christ]

Can you partake of the Lord's Supper with Catholics?
Yes   2 (22%)
No   7 (77%)
     
Total Votes: 9  

I wonder who voted yes>>>>>>>>>LOL

[Tibby]

Can you partake of the Lord's Supper with Catholics?
Yes   2 (22%)
No   7 (77%)
     
Total Votes: 9  

I wonder who voted yes>>>>>>>>>LOL

Thats one of lifes big mysteries, ain't it? Oh, some mysteries may never be solved.

[michael_legna]

Can you partake of the Lord's Supper with Catholics?
Yes   2 (22%)
No   7 (77%)
     
Total Votes: 9  

I wonder who voted yes>>>>>>>>>LOL

I certainly hope it wasn't the Catholics as they should never encourage anyone to bring down judgement on themselves for receiving unworthily, not discerning the body and blood of our Lord.

I know I voted no.

[Allinall]

Michael.  You are a blithering baffoon.  Sorry.  But that's the truth.  You see what you want and fail to accept what is truth.  I'm done with you.

[Tibby]

You see what you want and fail to accept what is truth.

Truly, these words were posted by a man who know all about this issue.

I still love you, Allinall

[Allinall]

Truly, these words were posted by a man who know all about this issue.  

I still love you, Allinall

Ya know what Tib?  I love you too man!  Imagine that.  And you're a Catholic!    Oooooh fine.  I suppose I should ask forgiveness from Michael and all y'all for my childish tantrum.  Will you all forgive me?

[Tibby]

Aw, no problem, bro.