If the Catholic Church was as evil as some say, what has replaced it today considering Protestants rule U.S.?

Question

Do you think the Protestant liberal internationalism of Woodrow Wilson, FDR, George H.W. Bush is the most evil institution today?

Answer 1

I'd say any institution with a lot of power or influence that most people don't agree with lol. You must understand that for there to have been protestantism the reformers had to make the roman catholic church appear evil even if it was not. Because the roman catholic church would not allow people to practice their faith anyway they wanted to. I mean what you have to understand is large relgions & large nations will always get more attention than small religions & small nations. And because of their influence they will get rediculed the worst. That is what happens. The Egyptians, The Persians, The Roman Empire, The British, The Soviet Union, The USA ect. ect.. All of these nations have been hated & considered evil. And the main reason is because of their power, their influence & ability to shape peoples lives who do not want them to shape their lives. So what i'm trying to say is just because an institution is big, it doesn't make it any more evil than other institutions, but what it does do is make people believe that they should have more accountablity for their actions & their actions are looked at through a magnifying glass & with a fine toothed comb.

Answer 2

Talk about mish-mashing religion and politics, then really mixing up politics.... wow...

Let's start by separating out the religion and the politics. Catholicism was never considered "evil." Catholicism had a long and complicated history of declaring that the pope was supreme over all other governments. This attitude and practice was in large part why England's Henry VIII parted ways with the Catholic Church (that, and the pope wouldn't give him a divorce!).

The fear was that if a Catholic was to ever be in the position of power, he would be a puppet ruled by Rome (in fact, English law STILL forbids a Catholic from taking the throne).

There really is no such thing as "Protestant liberal internationalism." Protestantism is, itself, split among so many factions with so many different points of view on not only doctrinal matters but political issues that it's almost ridiculous to consider it anything but a loose category.

Wilson is the only "liberal internationalist" in the three presidents you mentioned. FDR would have happily stayed out of WWII if he could have, because he considered the problems of the Great Depression to be more pressing than the fight in Europe. But Pearl Harbor didn't give him much of a choice. GHW Bush was not an internationalist, but more of a "realist" in terms of his foreign policy. He sent troops to Kuwait, but pulled back after chasing the Iraqis back across their border.

Answer 3

Nope. The difference is the Catholic Church had a monopoly and they used it to keep people under their control. Protestant belief is fragmented and is based on the belief that no one stands between you and Christ or God. You do NOT have to go to church to have salvation, but they would like you to.

Some churches do try to browbeat their members and they'd rather have sheep in their flocks than anything else, but if you are not a sheep and you decide to change, you can. There's another one down the street with a different message. The good thing is Protestants don't burn people at the stakes for leaving their church.

As far as the presidents go, only Bush is dangerously religious. The others were actually leaders who knew that religion cannot be the driving force in US politics. Bush is a sheep posing as a leader. Very dangerous.

Answer 4

fundementalist christians