Does Catholic rudeness keep you away from the Church?

[Hajnalcsillag]

You make it sound like the other organization that has roots down Italy way.

Cordially,
Mick

As someone who has family that consists of a bunch of Italians from northeast Ohio, I got a good laugh out of this one.

 

[1holycatholic]

Is that a doctrine which Catholics must believe?

Wonderingly,
Mick

It’s in the Creed:
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

It’s in the Catechism:
1582 As in the case of Baptism and Confirmation this share in Christ’s office is granted once for all. The sacrament of Holy Orders, like the other two, confers an indelible spiritual character and cannot be repeated or conferred temporarily.74

1583 It is true that someone validly ordained can, for grave reasons, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense,75 because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.

 

[RobHom]

I have never been “off-put” by Catholics…in forums or otherwise.

I have known Catholics personally that I wasn’t really comfortable with…but then I would have to place them in the Cafeteria crew who attend Mass “out of obligation” as opposed to desire.

I personally think that Catholics in general are far more humble than others… We are taught that “humility” is a virtue, and most all of us understand that and embrace it. I do realize that there are those of us who are more ardent in our feelings and beliefs, and I know that even I am occasionally somewhat “Jesuitical” in my beliefs, but then I am somewhat ardent as a Catholic and by nature extremely conservative…

 

[SSTeacher]

As someone who has family that consists of a bunch of Italians from northeast Ohio, I got a good laugh out of this one.

Well, that makes two of us, then, because I must confess that I was laughing when I wrote it.

Jocularly,
Mick
:bounce:

 

[SSTeacher]

It’s in the Creed:
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

It’s in the Catechism:
1582 As in the case of Baptism and Confirmation this share in Christ’s office is granted once for all. The sacrament of Holy Orders, like the other two, confers an indelible spiritual character and cannot be repeated or conferred temporarily.74

1583 It is true that someone validly ordained can, for grave reasons, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense,75 because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.

So you must believe it?

Inquiringly,
Mick

 

[Hisalone]

I personally think that Catholics in general are far more humble than others… We are taught that “humility” is a virtue, and most all of us understand that and embrace it. I do realize that there are those of us who are more ardent in our feelings and beliefs, and I know that even I am occasionally somewhat “Jesuitical” in my beliefs, but then I am somewhat ardent as a Catholic and by nature extremely conservative…

Your killing me hoss.

A Catholic believes Catholics are more humble than others.

Reminds me of a cartoon I once saw where two monks are walking down a path and one monk says to the other “There is nothing you can teach me about humility”

 

[1holycatholic]

So you must believe it?

Inquiringly,
Mick

What’s the point of being Catholic if you don’t believe what the Church teaches?
The dogmas of the faith

88 The Church’s Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these.

89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely, if our life is upright, our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.50

90 The mutual connections between dogmas, and their coherence, can be found in the whole of the Revelation of the mystery of Christ.51 "In Catholic doctrine there exists an order or hierarchy of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith."52

 

[SSTeacher]

I personally think that Catholics in general are far more humble than others…

Hi Rob,

What do you think about the way Bill Donohue conducts himself? Surely even his most ardent admirer would shy away from describing Mr. Donohue’s stance as humble? I’ve even heard it suggested that he is rude.

Curiously,
Mick

 

[RobHom]

Your killing me hoss.

Kewl beans… That means today is a really good day!! I made someone laugh or happy with mirth!! I live for that!!~!!

A Catholic believes Catholics are more humble than others.

Actually, I do believe that…because 99% of the people that encounter Catholics aren’t the least bit aware of who or what they are…because Catholics don’t wear their “religion” on their shoulders or announce it at the slightest opportunity…

Reminds me of a cartoon I once saw where two monks are walking down a path and one monk says to the other “There is nothing you can teach me about humility”

Something was lost in the writing… I would have thought it might have you would have more appropriately used a joke that had something to do with “where the stepping stones are”…

Beyond that my friend…in the event that you do not believe that Catholics are humble people, I would have to suggest that you know no Catholics or very few…

 

[MDK]

MY amusement is with those who claim that there has never been a change in doctrine, that the “Catholic” church is the same today as it has been for 2000 years, what are they looking at?:whacky:

That is humorous. The doctrine that existed long ago is still there, and hasn’t been deleted or denied. Doctrine can be developed to provide a greater understanding. That has happened. It is the same Church in the sense that it’s the one Jesus built with Peter as Prime Minister. However, it has grown a lot as it was intended to, as Jesus’ universal Church for all His family.

 

[MDK]

That’s a great point. Many don’t realize that even today within the Vatican itself there are divisions on Marian beliefs, scripture vs tradition etc. etc. So to make a claim that everyone believes the same thing is quite ridiculous.

It would be ridiculous if that were the claim made by the Church. You’ve created a straw man argument, and successfully knocked down your invented and false claim. The behavior of Catholics may be the worst of the arguments for being in the Church. The infallible teachings are a very good reason. There are many more, though.

 

[RobHom]

Hi Rob,

What do you think about the way Bill Donohue conducts himself? Surely even his most ardent admirer would shy away from describing Mr. Donohue’s stance as humble? I’ve even heard it suggested that he is rude.

Curiously,
Mick

Mick,

In all honesty…I have to plead a measure of “ignorance” where he is concerned…I have not read that much about him, or heard much that he has said. I have heard that he is brash, and doesn’t pull too many punches…

BUT, despite my occasional posts here, I am one of those people who believes that you can accomplish more through kindness and reasonable actions and language than by brashly challenging someone… Perhaps he could benefit from a “professional communications course”…

On the other hand…he may be serving as a counterpoint to those on the other side of the coin…

But…I would still prefer to approach things carefully and with kindness before ever considering drawing the sword…

 

[MDK]

…Beyond that my friend…in the event that you do not believe that Catholics are humble people, I would have to suggest that you know no Catholics or very few…

For example, is it humble for one to create their own church and doctrine because they just can’t buy into the one built by Christ and His doctrine?

It takes humility to submit to and accept what Christ has established. I would have it no other way, though.

 

[SSTeacher]

What’s the point of being Catholic if you don’t believe what the Church teaches

Well, not much point at all, I guess. I read someplace – in a book by the Catholic Evidence Guild Aussie, Frank Sheed, I think it was – that the mark of a good Catholic is to do as the Church teaches. That seems fair enough.

So you must believe that a Catholic like SpiritMeadow who decides that Catholicism does not contain the fullness of truth and goes off to be an Episcopalian or similar is still somehow hooked into Catholicism even though as far as the person is concerned all ties have been severed?

Thoughtfully,
Mick

 

[1holycatholic]

Well, not much point at all, I guess. I read someplace – in a book by the Catholic Evidence Guild Aussie, Frank Sheed, I think it was – that the mark of a good Catholic is to do as the Church teaches. That seems fair enough.

So you must believe that a Catholic like SpiritMeadow who decides that Catholicism does not contain the fullness of truth and goes off to be an Episcopalian or similar is still somehow hooked into Catholicism even though as far as the person is concerned all ties have been severed?

Thoughtfully,
Mick

A boy who runs away from home and denies his parents exist is still their child.

 

[SSTeacher]

A boy who runs away from home and denies his parents exist is still their child.

I’ll take that as a yes to my question, then.

Interesting analogy. So how do you suppose an objective observer would describe the relationship between the boy and his parents if the boy did indeed deny that his parents existed following which his parents went on TV and instead of asking members of the public to come forward with information as to their son’s whereabouts announced that as far as they were concerned their son was anathema?

Courteously,
Mick

 

[LilyM]

I’ll take that as a yes to my question, then.

Interesting analogy. So how do you suppose an objective observer would describe the relationship between the boy and his parents if the boy did indeed deny that his parents existed following which his parents went on TV and instead of asking members of the public to come forward with information as to their son’s whereabouts announced that as far as they were concerned their son was anathema?

Courteously,
Mick

Well, we have to remember that the parents have lived at the same address for years The son knows exactly where to find them if he wants to make up and come home. And that they will give him the warmest of warm welcomes, no questions asked, only insisting that while he is under their roof he abide by their rules, which is fair.

And that every day since he’s left, they have been pleading for him to come home, publicly, by every means available to them. He certainly wouldn’t like it if they knocked down his door and forcibly dragged him back to live with them, so they respect his adulthood and don’t resort to force. It doesn’t mean they’ve stopped for a second wanting or seeking for him to come back.

Now assume that he’s made clear that he wants nothing whatever to do with them, which is the only situation in which they would act against him, and he has said that he doesn’t consider himself to be their child. Assume further that he has raised his own children and grandchildren in similar hatred, antipathy, and denial of their relationship, since the parents have waited that long in utmost patience, in hopes of his return.

Then they are well within their rights to cut him and them out of their will, to acknowledge his own one-sided rupture of the relationship, his own desire to be no longer part of the family. Which was entirely his choice and not theirs.

Remember also that in doing this they make abundantly clear that on a second’s notice, with the simplest of statements of ‘I’m sorry, forgive me’, and a promise to abide by their rules, they will instantly forgive him and reinstate him to all his birthright.

Even with all of the above - we’re talking about a relationship that goes deeper than a name and a shared address, and that effectively the relationship is a done deal, and was from the second of his birth. They will never and have never stopped being his parents, nor has he ever stopped or will ever stop being their son. Even though they honoured his own free will desire to no longer be considered their child.

 

[SSTeacher]

Mick,

In all honesty…I have to plead a measure of “ignorance” where he is concerned…I have not read that much about him, or heard much that he has said. I have heard that he is brash, and doesn’t pull too many punches…

BUT, despite my occasional posts here, I am one of those people who believes that you can accomplish more through kindness and reasonable actions and language than by brashly challenging someone… Perhaps he could benefit from a “professional communications course”…

On the other hand…he may be serving as a counterpoint to those on the other side of the coin…

But…I would still prefer to approach things carefully and with kindness before ever considering drawing the sword…

Rob,

That’s a helpful approach. I daresay there are many examples within Catholicism of humility. Pride is easy to spot but humility is a character trait that’s not immediately evident. How can one tell if a person is humble?

But courtesy and rudeness are both equally apparent. I think that’s the consideration here. Why opt to be rude when you can choose to be polite?

Circumspectly,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

Well, we have to remember that the parents have lived at the same address for years The son knows exactly where to find them if he wants to make up and come home. And that they will give him the warmest of warm welcomes, no questions asked, only insisting that while he is under their roof he abide by their rules, which is fair.

And that every day since he’s left, they have been pleading for him to come home, publicly, by every means available to them. He certainly wouldn’t like it if they knocked down his door and forcibly dragged him back to live with them, so they respect his adulthood and don’t resort to force. It doesn’t mean they’ve stopped for a second wanting or seeking for him to come back.

Now assume that he’s made clear that he wants nothing whatever to do with them, which is the only situation in which they would act against him, and he has said that he doesn’t consider himself to be their child. Assume further that he has raised his own children and grandchildren in similar hatred, antipathy, and denial of their relationship, since the parents have waited that long in utmost patience, in hopes of his return.

Then they are well within their rights to cut him and them out of their will, to acknowledge his own one-sided rupture of the relationship, his own desire to be no longer part of the family. Which was entirely his choice and not theirs.

Remember also that in doing this they make abundantly clear that on a second’s notice, with the simplest of statements of ‘I’m sorry, forgive me’, and a promise to abide by their rules, they will instantly forgive him and reinstate him to all his birthright.

Even with all of the above - we’re talking about a relationship that goes deeper than a name and a shared address, and that effectively the relationship is a done deal, and was from the second of his birth. They will never and have never stopped being his parents, nor has he ever stopped or will ever stop being their son. Even though they honoured his own free will desire to no longer be considered their child.

Hi Lily,

I very much enjoyed being gently led through this analogy, which you developed so nicely and, if I may say, rather cleverly. You stated the case in a very pleasant and informative manner and I believe I should now say my prayers and go to bed in contentment.

Night, night, and God bless you.

Gratefully,
Mick

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

The true church is the univeral church as it exists today in all it’s variations?? How can something be true and have variations? As I’ve read, in the fourth century, the Fathers of the church looked at the biblical testimony and discerned four strong characteristics of the church those being one,holy,catholic,and apostolic.

What - like Catholicism ? That’s pretty varied. Unity is not the same thing as uniformity - an insect preserved in amber for millions of years is unchanging; it is also dead. Variety within unity OTOH is evidence of life, or it can be.​