"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words:"

hinault

This post is addressed to members of the Catholic Church here.

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet

Gospel of St.Matthew Chapter 10 verse 14.

When people choose to refuse to not accept church teaching, St.Matthew's gospel states how an apostle must behave. He must walk away.

At what point does one decide that those who choose to refuse to not accept
church teaching?

Matt Markinson

hinault wrote: »

At what point does one decide that those who choose to refuse to not accept
church teaching?

Like the self righteous who don't accept the magisterium of Vatican II, or the election of Pope Francis and what he emphasises, and much prefer the false claims of conspiracy websites ?

hinault

Matt Markinson wrote: »

Like the self righteous who don't accept the magisterium of Vatican II, or the election of Pope Francis

The question I asked was directed to Catholics here.

The question I asked was not directed to liberal versus traditional views within
Catholicism.

The questions pertains to Catholics and at what point do they decide to shake off the dust from their feet concerning non-Catholics who choose to not accept the teaching of the church?

Speedwell

If you mean, "when should I wise up and realise I'm not wanted", the answer is "before I get myself a name for being an intransigent troll". Ideally.

Matt Markinson

hinault wrote: »

The questions pertains to Catholics and at what point do they decide to shake off the dust from their feet concerning non-Catholics who choose to not accept the teaching of the church?

That perfectly describes those who don't accept the teaching of Vatican II and prefer any and every wild conspiracy theory and superstition instead, while complaining about Pope Francis and his compassion.

lazybones32

hinault wrote: »

The questions pertains to Catholics and at what point do they decide to shake off the dust from their feet concerning non-Catholics who choose to not accept the teaching of the church?

You decide the point and boundaries. It's up to you to decide how far you're willing to go.

People are free to accept or reject whatever they want. It's no-one's job to make people believe the teachings of the Church but there's the option to present the correct teaching when a genuine question is asked or an incorrect statement is made. Link, quote or reference the actual position and leave it there...the ones who are genuinely looking for answers will find them and those who only want to sling mud will continue to do so.

Speedwell wrote: »

If you mean, "when should I wise up and realise I'm not wanted", the answer is "before I get myself a name for being an intransigent troll". Ideally.

I wouldn't consider myself a morning person but you bring AM crankiness to a whole new level! :mad:

Matt Markinson

Only today in St. Peter's square Pope Francis said Jesus' call to conversion is an experience of unmerited love which leads to openness to others, especially to the poor. ( and presumably to the spiritually poor as well as those poor materially )

He said Jesus' call to conversion was expressed in closeness to sinners and mercy to those in need, rather than in judgment, allowing sinners to feel God’s loving mercy and to open their hearts to his gift of forgiveness.

Delirium

MOD NOTE

hinault wrote: »

The question I asked was directed to Catholics here.

The question I asked was not directed to liberal versus traditional views within
Catholicism.

The questions pertains to Catholics and at what point do they decide to shake off the dust from their feet concerning non-Catholics who choose to not accept the teaching of the church?

This is a discussion forum. Posters are free to post on a thread once they don't breach the charter.

Posters do not have the authority to limit who may or may not respond to posts/threads.

Speedwell wrote: »

If you mean, "when should I wise up and realise I'm not wanted", the answer is "before I get myself a name for being an intransigent troll". Ideally.

Kindly refrain from posting personal comments or accussing a poster of being a troll.

If you think someone is trolling please make use of the report button.

Speedwell

Delirium wrote: »

Kindly refrain from posting personal comments or accussing a poster of being a troll.

If you think someone is trolling please make use of the report button.

Fair point about personal comments. But I was referring to other people who called the OP a troll, not calling him one myself. My post might not have been very gentle, but it was just cautionary.

hinault

Delirium wrote: »

MOD NOTE

This is a discussion forum. Posters are free to post on a thread once they don't breach the charter.

Posters do not have the authority to limit who may or may not respond to posts/threads.

I never suggested otherwise.

hinault

Matt Markinson wrote: »

Only today in St. Peter's square Pope Francis said Jesus' call to conversion is an experience of unmerited love which leads to openness to others, especially to the poor. ( and presumably to the spiritually poor as well as those poor materially )

He said Jesus' call to conversion was expressed in closeness to sinners and mercy to those in need, rather than in judgment, allowing sinners to feel God’s loving mercy and to open their hearts to his gift of forgiveness.

Even Jesus during His ministry on Earth could not convert some.

Conversion must be voluntary above all.
Thereafter conversion must appeal to the mind and the heart respectively.

uck51js9zml2yt

Hinault of course can't see this ( or chooses not to respond to it) but some of actually experienced a real conversion and left the RCC.
Judging from hinaults comments I wonder does he consider himself an apostle and able to write people off who disagree with him.
Rather than consider someone an apostate. I prefer to consider someone as being a person for whom Christ died.

Asaiah

This protestant / Catholic tit for tat is tiresome. Are we not followers of Christ?

Too many Pharasees on this thread. LOVE thy neighbour.

As for giving up on people who are not receptive to the Christian message. Well I have dusted my feet in several threads on boards where my Christian opinions were met with ' sky fairy' and whatnot.

I've come to believe that people are converterd by example and seeing how Christ has worked in your life rather than by debate.

hinault

Asaiah wrote: »

This protestant / Catholic tit for tat is tiresome. Are we not followers of Christ?

I asked the question specifically of members here of the Catholic Church in my OP.

Asaiah wrote: »

As for giving up on people who are not receptive to the Christian message. Well I have dusted my feet in several threads on boards where my Christian opinions were met with ' sky fairy' and whatnot.

That's the demographic I had in mind when posting my OP. At what point do you simply walk away?

solodeogloria

Good morning hinault!

Do you think that Protestants are Christians? Or are we unbelievers?

If we are Christians the verse that you quoted isn't just for Roman Catholics it's what Jesus says to us all.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

uck51js9zml2yt

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning hinault!

Do you think that Protestants are Christians? Or are we unbelievers?

If we are Christians the verse that you quoted isn't just for Roman Catholics it's what Jesus says to us all.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

I'm not even Protestant:)
But hinault has made clear that anyone who is not RC is an apostate and has fallen away from the one true RCC.
Good job, stoning and burning at the stake are illegal in Ireland or I'd be done for

hinault

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning hinault!

Do you think that Protestants are Christians? Or are we unbelievers?

If we are Christians the verse that you quoted isn't just for Roman Catholics it's what Jesus says to us all.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

This isn't the thread for discussing this.

keano_afc

Does your question apply to evangelical Christians who give the gospel to members of the RCC?

Delirium

hinault wrote: »

This isn't the thread for discussing this.

MOD NOTE

If you have a problem with post, please report it, don't back-seat moderate the thread.

@everyone else, this thread is not only limited to Roman Catholic responses only. Just remember to keep within the boundaries of the charter

Thanks for your attention.

hinault

Delirium wrote: »

MOD NOTE

If you have a problem with post, please report it, don't back-seat moderate the thread.

@everyone else, this thread is not only limited to Roman Catholic responses only. Just remember to keep within the boundaries of the charter

Thanks for your attention.

I don't have a problem with the post.

I assumed that if I replied you'd accuse me of derailing the thread :rolleyes:

I did report the post in fact.
I'll make sure to screenshot for all future reported posts.

looksee

hinault wrote: »

This post is addressed to members of the Catholic Church here.



Gospel of St.Matthew Chapter 10 verse 14.

When people choose to refuse to not accept church teaching, St.Matthew's gospel states how an apostle must behave. He must walk away.

At what point does one decide that those who choose to refuse to not accept church teaching (should be walked away from)?

I think that make the post a bit clearer. The bible is common to many denominations and all are aware of the 'shake the dust from your feet' instruction. How or why would a Catholic's response to this instruction be any different to any other denomination?

To answer your question (though not as a Catholic) your response would be when someone says to you 'I do not believe what you are saying' or 'I do not accept what you are saying' or 'you are wrong' or 'I am not interested'.

Does this question mean you are considering un-ignoring the people who do not respond in the way you prefer?

hinault

looksee wrote: »

I think that make the post a bit clearer. The bible is common to many denominations and all are aware of the 'shake the dust from your feet' instruction. How or why would a Catholic's response to this instruction be any different to any other denomination?

I disagree that your editing what I posted make the post clearer.

People who refuse to believe make a choice first.
A decision to accept or a decision to refute is a choice, in essence.

So presented with a choice, a person first decides to act on that choice by choosing to refuse to believe or choosing to believe.

It is a two step process.

looksee wrote: »

Does this question mean you are considering un-ignoring the people who do not respond in the way you prefer?

There's not a snowballs chance in Hell that those are ignored will be unignored.

looksee

hinault wrote: »

I disagree that your editing what I posted make the post clearer.

People who refuse to believe make a choice first.
A decision to accept or a decision to refute is a choice, in essence.

So presented with a choice, a person first decides to act on that choice by choosing to refuse to believe or choosing to believe.

It is a two step process.

Ok, suit yourself, but I think you will find that your original means the opposite to what you think it means, and the last sentence is not a sentence at all. Your explanation does not clarify anything.

There's not a snowballs chance in Hell that those are ignored will be unignored.

I am not clear on what your thinking is on reasons for ignoring people, but presumably they either do not accept your opinions or you cannot refute their arguments? Either way this is the 'walk away' scenario that you are asking about. You could stay and try and bring them round with the love, charity and coherence of your arguments, or you can walk away. You have answered your own question.

hinault

looksee wrote: »

I am not clear on what your thinking is on reasons for ignoring people, but presumably they either do not accept your opinions or you cannot refute their arguments? Either way this is the 'walk away' scenario that you are asking about. You could stay and try and bring them round with the love, charity and coherence of your arguments, or you can walk away. You have answered your own question.

The ignore function is a timesaver in that you don't have to read, or reply to, drivel.
Practically all of the arguments presented have been argued previously before here anyhow.

There's no point exchanging views with convinced heretics, atheists.

What is of interest is how one reaches the conclusion that the person choosing to refuse to accept church teaching is a convinced heretic, atheist.

Cabaal

hinault wrote: »

The ignore function is a timesaver in that you don't have to read, or reply to, drivel.
Practically all of the arguments presented have been argued previously before here anyhow.

There's no point exchanging views with convinced heretics, atheists.

What is of interest is how one reaches the conclusion that the person choosing to refuse to accept church teaching is a convinced heretic, atheist.

Why don't you just send e-mails to yourself and then just respond back to them? You can pretend its your own little forum and it will also mean you'll never get any response that differs from your own.

Its clear you have no interest in any discussion that doesn't mirror your own viewpoint, so one has to question why you even post in this forum?

You don't even agree with other Catholics in this forum because in most cases you consider them non-Catholics,
:rolleyes:

Timberrrrrrrr

hinault wrote: »

The ignore function is a timesaver in that you don't have to read, or reply to, drivel.
Practically all of the arguments presented have been argued previously before here anyhow.

There's no point exchanging views with convinced heretics, atheists.

What is of interest is how one reaches the conclusion that the person choosing to refuse to accept church teaching is a convinced heretic, atheist.

her·e·tic (hĕr′ĭ-tĭk)
n.
A person who holds controversial opinions, especially one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church.
adj.
Heretical.

Nothing controversial about not believing in a "god"

Sure you're a heretic yourself a couple of thousand times over!

solodeogloria

hinault wrote: »

The ignore function is a timesaver in that you don't have to read, or reply to, drivel.
Practically all of the arguments presented have been argued previously before here anyhow.

There's no point exchanging views with convinced heretics, atheists.

What is of interest is how one reaches the conclusion that the person choosing to refuse to accept church teaching is a convinced heretic, atheist.

Good evening!

I'm a "heretic" that wants to learn and listen. My question about Protestants being unbelievers is a fair one on the basis of your OP.

I can't apologise for being Protestant but I can offer you a listening ear if you want to help me understand.

If not there's probably not much you're going to get out if being here.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

uck51js9zml2yt

Cabaal wrote: »

Why don't you just send e-mails to yourself and then just respond back to them? You can pretend its your own little forum and it will also mean you'll never get any response that differs from your own.

Its clear you have no interest in any discussion that doesn't mirror your own viewpoint, so one has to question why you even post in this forum?

You don't even agree with other Catholics in this forum because in most cases you consider them non-Catholics,
:rolleyes:

You made me spill my tea

eviltwin

hinault wrote: »

The ignore function is a timesaver in that you don't have to read, or reply to, drivel.
Practically all of the arguments presented have been argued previously before here anyhow.

There's no point exchanging views with convinced heretics, atheists.

What is of interest is how one reaches the conclusion that the person choosing to refuse to accept church teaching is a convinced heretic, atheist.

Would you call yourself a happy person Hinault?

hinault

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

I'm a "heretic" that wants to learn and listen. My question about Protestants being unbelievers is a fair one on the basis of your OP.

I can't apologise for being Protestant but I can offer you a listening ear if you want to help me understand.

If not there's probably not much you're going to get out if being here.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

I'll take a raincheck on that offer instead, thanks all the same.

Speedwell

Damn, you have to be a real hard case to diss DJ Solo.

looksee

You know, Hinault, I thought from your OP that you were asking 'how long can I continue trying to convince people of Jesus' message before I should gracefully walk away?' But I don't think that is the case, you are actually asking 'what is the minimum length of time I should feel obliged to talk to unbelievers before I can slam the door on them?'

hinault

looksee wrote: »

You know, Hinault, I thought from your OP that you were asking 'how long can I continue trying to convince people of Jesus' message before I should gracefully walk away?' But I don't think that is the case, you are actually asking 'what is the minimum length of time I should feel obliged to talk to unbelievers before I can slam the door on them?'

I agree with the sentiment.

I'd probably express it a bit more subtly.:o

eviltwin

Is that something you'd actually do Hinault, try and convince people you know are not Catholic to convert?

looksee

eviltwin wrote: »

Is that something you'd actually do Hinault, try and convince people you know are not Catholic to convert?

In fairness, I am not getting that from his posts. Quite the reverse, he does not want to talk to anyone who does not agree with him. Not quite sure why he is here tbh.

hinault

eviltwin wrote: »

Is that something you'd actually do Hinault, try and convince people you know are not Catholic to convert?

I'm not here to convert anyone else here.
People are entitled to believe whatever they chose, and good luck to them.

There are several distinctions on this part of the site.
There are those who believe in God, and there are those who don't believe in God.

For some reason those who don't believe in God are permitted to post to this part of the site. It is my opinion that engaging with such posters is a complete waste of time, my time more crucially.

Those here who do believe in God but who do not share my belief in God?
That's a more nuanced issue. There are several such posters who's views I read and who through their posts seem to be sincere individuals.
Of course there are others in the same category, who are again a complete waste of time engaging with.

looksee

hinault wrote: »

I'm not here to convert anyone else here.
People are entitled to believe whatever they chose, and good luck to them.

There are several distinctions on this part of the site.
There are those who believe in God, and there are those who don't believe in God.

For some reason those who don't believe in God are permitted to post to this part of the site. It is my opinion that engaging with such posters is a complete waste of time, my time more crucially.

Those here who do believe in God but who do not share my belief in God?
That's a more nuanced issue. There are several such posters who's views I read and who through their posts seem to be sincere individuals.
Of course there are others in the same category, who are again a complete waste of time engaging with.

Do you think that Christians should be allowed to post in the atheism forum?

uck51js9zml2yt

hinault wrote: »

I'm not here to convert anyone else here.
People are entitled to believe whatever they chose, and good luck to them.

There are several distinctions on this part of the site.
There are those who believe in God, and there are those who don't believe in God.

For some reason those who don't believe in God are permitted to post to this part of the site. It is my opinion that engaging with such posters is a complete waste of time, my time more crucially.

Those here who do believe in God but who do not share my belief in God?
That's a more nuanced issue. There are several such posters who's views I read and who through their posts seem to be sincere individuals.
Of course there are others in the same category, who are again a complete waste of time engaging with.

It makes me wonder why he bothers with this forum:D Of course,I'm in the "complete waste of time" category:rolleyes:

hinault

looksee wrote: »

Do you think that Christians should be allowed to post in the atheism forum?

Whether they're allowed post there or not, is not my call.

Whether they should post there or not? Personally I think they're wasting their time doing so.

Hotei

eviltwin wrote: »

Would you call yourself a happy person Hinault?

Interesting question.

uck51js9zml2yt

hinault wrote: »

Whether they're allowed post there or not, is not my call.

Whether they should post there or not? Personally I think they're wasting their time doing so.

I knew it, he's a secret Calvinist

Speedwell

Hinault and the "work-to-rule" approach to the Great Commission, eh?

If faith is to be defended, it should be defensible, here or in any other forum.

Delirium

MOD NOTE

Speedwell wrote: »

Hinault and the "work-to-rule" approach to the Great Commission, eh?

If faith is to be defended, it should be defensible, here or in any other forum.

From the charter:

The purpose of this forum is to discuss Christian belief in general, and specific elements of it, between Christians and non-Christians alike. This forum has the additional purpose of being a point on Boards.ie where Christians may ask other Christians questions about their shared faith. In this regard, Christians should not have to defend their faith from overt or subtle attack.

Locking this thread as it doesn't seem to be on-topic and is instead focussing on how hinault interacts with other posters on the forum (vis-a-vis the use of the ignore feature).