Dialogue and Debate

**Okay folks, some here seem to need a refresher on dialogue and debate with non-Catholic religions. Since we have more Lutherans in NCR than at any time in the past, those Catholics who are debating Lutherans need to understand the below rules still apply.

Guidelines
For both Catholic and non-Catholic posters:
It is acceptable to question the doctrine or dogma of another’s faith
It is never acceptable to question the sincerity of an individual’s beliefs

Bringing up historical controversies peculiar to a particular religion should be done cautiously*
It is acceptable to discuss the effect the incident had on current policy or practice.
It is acceptable to seek the truth vs. commonly-held beliefs or conventional wisdom about actual events.
It is fallacious reasoning to use embarrassing incidents to claim that they “prove” a particular religion is false.
Expecting members of any Church to defend or answer for the excesses or extremism of bodies that have broken with it is a technique that has no merit and can’t be defended.

Now, to make it clear, discussing whether or not Martin Luther or any other Reformer was mentally ill (I don’t think they’re available to be psychoanalyzed at the moment), falls into that. Discussing any past sins they committed, (he who is without sin?), also falls into that.
If you wish to debate, do so by putting yourself in the shoes of the person you are talking to.
Such remarks when I was still Protestant drove me away and were added to my list of dislikes for Catholics.
These rules are NOT open for debate.

I’ll leave this thread open if you wish to comment.**

Thank you for this.

I would like to add that I read a lot of interesting threads that get turned into yet ANOTHER Lutheran vs Catholic belief thread, and killing the original subject.

I would appreciate that people would take that very interesting and important discussion to it’s own thread rather than smother another subject.

I am not talking about sharing the teaching of a particular faith on that subject at hand, but taking it way beyond that and going off on a tangent that takes over the discussion.

Of course this applies to any faith or subject…if it’s veering off into it’s own “thing”, give it it’s own thread. That way everything gets the attention it deserves.

Thank you Eric. I have been quite distressed over the last few months the the vigorous detraction of Luther and Lutherans. It has made it impossible for me to have any productive dialogue with my Lutheran brethren about their faith. My efforts to pick their brains about the sacramental view was completely hijacked by overzealous Catholics desiring to find fault rather than understanding.

With regard to Luther’s mental state, I do apologize to all if my comments came across as disparaging to the man. It is my understanding that one’s mental status (specifically a lack of mental health) mitigates one’s level of responsibility for one’s actions and I only suggested it as a possibility to consider that none of us can really know the mind of another, especially centuries ago. Since we can’t know, we are not in a position to pass judgment.

I will take your words to heart, though, and will refrain from speculating, and reference your post if speculation of this kind occurs.

I really would like the Non-Catholic Religions section to go back to an environment where beliefs can be compared and contrasted in a respectful and charitable manner.

Likewise, I do not wish to offend Lutherans and as stated I attend a Lutheran service on most weekends with a client.

And the sources I draw on are used at our local seminary in priestly formation, using the same text that they study.

However, I when I read articles…now on the plight of Iraqi Christians, irregardless of their horrendous situation, I am coming across terrible remarks about the Catholic Church, that we are not Christian, that we are unbiblical, and that the papacy is the Anti Christ.

It is a matter of going back to our own origins…there definitely was fault on both sides. But our origins go back to the beginning and only if our fellow brethren could go back before the Reformation to see our common faith and treasure trove of heritage of faith.

I believe those issues are not related to Dr Luther’s alleged mental state. They are or are not false, and that has a bearing on the truth or falsity of the Roman Catholic Church (and indeed of Protestantism).

bump

When I think about Martin Luther, I have to remind myself about the times he lived in and the times of today. I’ve seen lists of quotes by Martin Luther, posted on here even as well as other Catholic and Protestant sights that for one thing are pretty bold, somewhat curious and maybe even alarming. I also realize that a good majority of them are taken out of context and designed to make Luther look like a lunatic. One always has to consider that Martin Luther had a bold, “earthy” common man style. that is probably one reason his writings became popular with the everyday man. Writing styles that are bold like this can lead to bizarre quotes when taken out of context. Writing back in the 1500’s also could be more violent and black and white to the modern mind and understanding. It is always difficult to put events and writings back in the historical context of the time. Freedom of speech and thought, something we often take for granted today, was not on the political horizon back in that day. I know reading and learning about Martin Luther’s less than friendly Jewish quotes need to be balanced by Johanne Eckes equally less than friendly writings. Both are equally wrong but both men reflected the time and culture of their day.

I think one of the most painful parts of the vigorous bias for me is that lack of affirmation of the faith of Lutherans.

Assigning the views of Luther to modern Lutherans and drilling into what separates us to the point of failing to affirm our siblings in Christ.

I wonder how long Luther would last in this forum? :rolleyes:

Yet, I really enjoy the Lutherans here. They are some of my favorite members. :thumbsup:

He would’ve been banned in the first 2 posts :smiley:

I’m thinking he would be banned after the first post.

Yeah, he had a fondness for that word “papist”. :smiley:

But it is our staunchly Catholic members that are the ones lacking charity now.

Naw… he was full of nice things to say! :whistle:

Lutheran Insulter: ergofabulous.org/luther/

[warning: rather nasty language]

Maybe you are correct?

Okay, now I know who Blackadder was patterned after.
:smiley:

On the same site:
pangloss.com/seidel/Shaker/index.html?
:smiley:

I just had way too much fun looking at that website.

My favorite one so far:

You should not write a book before you have heard an old sow fart; and then you should open your jaws with awe, saying, “Thank you, lovely nightingale, that is just the text for me!”
:smiley:

I’m not sure what that even actually means, but it’s pretty awesome.

I have to say that I did go to that site and while it is some ways funny, it makes me wonder how he could have been able to be a reformist.

We would still infract you, but it would at least it amuse the moderators.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.