How Many Different Categories Of Catholics Are There?

[gurneyhalleck1]

To the OP: I consider myself a Star Trek Catholic

 

[eucharisteo]

There really is only one “category” of Catholic. It’s called a “sinner”.

 

[Vile_Servant]

There are two different categories of Catholics;

1. Those who are faithful to the Pope and the Magisterium of the Church.
   These Catholics fully accept, observe and practise Church doctrine, catechism and teaching.
2. Those who are not.
   These Catholics rebel against Papal Authority and the Magisterium of the Church (e.g. Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformers who were former Catholics, Schismatics like Archbishop Lefebvre, and Sedevacantists who believe that the last five Popes are Antipopes etc) To these are added Catholics who practice Cafeteria Catholicism e.g. Liberal Catholics, Catholics for Choice etc.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I thought it was an analysis but if you see it as accusatory, so be it.

Seems not unreasonable.

They’d be a bit illogical to believe what they knew to be false, don’t you think?

Your sentence structure leaves me at a loss as to what you are attempting to impart.

How can you tell what anybody is thinking? I acknowledge and accept that many Catholics feel they are authorized and entitled to speak on behalf the entire Catholic Church but I think I’d be irresponsible if I didn’t at least gently protest when a Catholic claims to know what “protestants” think.

I respectfully suggest that the main question for outsiders is whose testimony inside Catholicism to rely upon – not only concerning matters of doctrine but also when it comes to the life application of those doctrines. Although Catholic apologists seem to agree that no Catholic is infallible every Catholic seems to insist that whatever the content of his or her interpretive statement might be, the veneer of infallibility nevertheless covers it.

Which category of Catholic do you have in mind when you use the word, “they”? Is it,

a) Ultratraditionalist Catholics?
b) Traditionalist Catholics?
c) Liberal Catholics?
d) Charismatic/Evangelical Catholics?
e) Cultural Catholics?
f) Popular Folk Catholics?
g) American Catholics?

Maybe they are neither categories nor transgressors but denominations?

If you say so.

Who do you have in mind when you use the word “they,” and to which category of Catholics are you referring when you use the word “our”?

Cordially,
Mick

Analysis? from the beginning protestants have done nothing but to slander the CC. how else can they gather people to their fold? this is just another one. they seek to take Catholics from the Holy Church of God. unfornatunately, they have been succesfull in doing so. Catholics are just sheeps being deceived by the wolves. sheeps are easily deceived.

that is what we called being deceived and wanted to be deceived because they refuse to see what is True.

the feelings of a Catholic does not give them right or authority to decide what teach in teh CC. the teachings are there from the beginning. laity is called into obedience and not to vote or decide what is True.

It is what the CC says. if the CC conveyed the Bible to be what it is today, no Catholic has the right or authority to change that. the enterpretation has to be in accord with teh Church and not self enterpretation.

the Church is patient and wait for the prodigal sons to repent and come home. those who try to impose their ideology in the Church have not been succesfull. Catholics have free Will. the Church always tought this. it is only logical to think that many in the Church will have some big ideas. remember the Hebrew people? it is the same with in Jesus Church, the Catholic Church. some will ashtray, some will be more obedient and some will…whatever. but the Church remain the Same.

there are no denominations in the CC. there are transgressores of the laws of God in HIs Church.

:bowdown::bowdown2:

 

[wisdomseeker]

No, they’re not. Some Catholics favor the Tridentine Mass, and some favor the Novus Ordo Missae, which as been a bone of contention amongst Catholics since it was introduced four decades ago. Take some time to peruse some of the posts in the Traditional Catholicism forum and sooner or later you’ll discover Catholics vehemently disagreeing with each other yet each one claiming endorsement for his or her view from someplace within Catholic officialdom.

Well, at least you’re not claiming to be able to read their thoughts.

Contentedly,
Mick

it is so, since the changes in the Mass. but this is beyond what we are talking about here.

i favor the Latin Mass and pray for teh Come back. those who are against never really had the experience and are probably afraid because of the language. the Mass has pretty much the same elements. it is not divided in categories.

 

[schaick]

What is the difference between the Old Roman Catholic Church in North America, the Old Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic Church?

I’m not sure which, but one does not recognize infallibility and primacy of the Roman Pontiff. One of them ordains married men into the priesthood.

the-american-catholic.com/2010/03/09/the-state-of-american-catholicism/

National Catholic Church of America?

nationalcatholicchurchofamerica.org/comparisons.html

Has a table showing their differences and similarities.

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6396913:

I doubt that all Catholics would agree with you. For example, some Catholics do not think Clown Masses that are conducted in the spirit of Vatican II are valid. But other Catholics, including priests, do.

Uh - no. Someone may have mistakenly thought so back in the '70s, but today, such things do not exist. Any photographic evidence of such typically turns out to be Episcopalian in origin.

That’s interesting. Well, if Clown Masses no longer take place that’s something for which to be grateful. But I’d hazard a guess that the thinking that prompted Clown Masses to come into existence i.e. the spirit of Vatican II is still present in the Catholic Church.

Speculatively,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6396915:

If it does mean that, I daresay members of the Protestant Truth Society

might see fit to register disagreement.

Amiably,
Mick
Good for them! I am betting those people will be Catholic or Orthodox within the decade - I’ve seen it happen before.

Indeed. So have I.

Agreeably,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

To the OP: I consider myself a Star Trek Catholic

With the exception of the episode titled, Spock’s Brain, I’m a fan only of the original series. The follow up stuff (Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space) caused me to lose interest.

Sadly,
Mick
:sad_bye:

 

[SSTeacher]

There really is only one “category” of Catholic. It’s called a “sinner”.

Most Christians can assert as much without qualification but the Catholic Church has defined a hierarchy of sins categorizing some sins as mortal sins and other sins as venial sins. Nobody else in Christendom does this.

Observantly,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

There are two different categories of Catholics;

1. Those who are faithful to the Pope and the Magisterium of the Church.
   These Catholics fully accept, observe and practise Church doctrine, catechism and teaching.
2. Those who are not.
   These Catholics rebel against Papal Authority and the Magisterium of the Church (e.g. Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformers who were former Catholics, Schismatics like Archbishop Lefebvre, and Sedevacantists who believe that the last five Popes are Antipopes etc) To these are added Catholics who practice Cafeteria Catholicism e.g. Liberal Catholics, Catholics for Choice etc.

You seem to have grasped the idea. However, whereas you have decided to explain the divisions that exist inside the Catholic Church by adducing only two categories and subdividing your second category into sundry other categories, Mr. Samples and Doctor Rhodes have apparently seen no reason to do that. They have simply listed all seven categories.

Appreciatively,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6396397:

I thought it was an analysis but if you see it as accusatory, so be it.

Seems not unreasonable.

They’d be a bit illogical to believe what they knew to be false, don’t you think?

Your sentence structure leaves me at a loss as to what you are attempting to impart.

How can you tell what anybody is thinking? I acknowledge and accept that many Catholics feel they are authorized and entitled to speak on behalf the entire Catholic Church but I think I’d be irresponsible if I didn’t at least gently protest when a Catholic claims to know what “protestants” think.

I respectfully suggest that the main question for outsiders is whose testimony inside Catholicism to rely upon – not only concerning matters of doctrine but also when it comes to the life application of those doctrines. Although Catholic apologists seem to agree that no Catholic is infallible every Catholic seems to insist that whatever the content of his or her interpretive statement might be, the veneer of infallibility nevertheless covers it.

Which category of Catholic do you have in mind when you use the word, “they”? Is it,

a) Ultratraditionalist Catholics?
b) Traditionalist Catholics?
c) Liberal Catholics?
d) Charismatic/Evangelical Catholics?
e) Cultural Catholics?
f) Popular Folk Catholics?
g) American Catholics?

Maybe they are neither categories nor transgressors but denominations?

If you say so.

Who do you have in mind when you use the word “they,” and to which category of Catholics are you referring when you use the word “our”?

Cordially,
Mick

Analysis?

Yes, analysis. And quite a detailed one, too.

from the beginning protestants have done nothing but to slander the CC.

I’m not sure slander is the correct word.

how else can they gather people to their fold?

Ah, now I can see the faux pas. You typed slander but you meant evangelism.

this is just another one.

No, it isn’t.

they seek to take Catholics from the Holy Church of God.

Yes, they do. Aren’t Catholics supposed to do the same thing apropos Non–Catholics?

unfornatunately, they have been succesfull in doing so.

The opposition would probably not only suggest that their success was fortunate but that it was the result of God working behind the scenes in their favor.

Catholics are just sheeps being deceived by the wolves.

Non–Catholics make similar sheep/wolves assertions.

sheeps are easily deceived.

Except for the wise ones, like Larry the Lamb.

that is what we called being deceived and wanted to be deceived because they refuse to see what is True.

Perhaps. But it’s also possible that there might exist other people who sincerely believe something different from you.

the feelings of a Catholic does not give them right or authority to decide what teach in teh CC.

How do you know what other people are feeling?

the teachings are there from the beginning.

No, they weren’t. One has to take account of the development of doctrine in the Catholic Church.

laity is called into obedience and not to vote or decide what is True.

Everybody has to make decisions about what is true and what is untrue.

It is what the CC says.

Only if one has decided beforehand that the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth.

if the CC conveyed the Bible to be what it is today, no Catholic has the right or authority to change that. the enterpretation has to be in accord with teh Church and not self enterpretation.

Perhaps some people sincerely believe that the Catholic Church has fallen into error and teaches extra–biblical doctrines that are false?

the Church is patient and wait for the prodigal sons to repent and come home.

So be patient, then. Refrain from impatient jibes such as, “they refuse to see what is True,” and “from the beginning protestants have done nothing but to slander the CC.”

those who try to impose their ideology in the Church have not been succesfull.

Some might say that those who have orchestrated changes in the spirit of Vatican II have met with a fair degree of success

Catholics have free Will. the Church always tought this.

That’s good news.

it is only logical to think that many in the Church will have some big ideas. remember the Hebrew people?

I’ve read about them in the Bible.

it is the same with in Jesus Church, the Catholic Church. some will ashtray, some will be more obedient and some will…whatever. but the Church remain the Same.

I disagree. The pre–conciliar Catholic Church is not the same as the post–conciliar Catholic Church.

there are no denominations in the CC.

But there are different categories of Catholics.

there are transgressores of the laws of God in HIs Church.

And, despite their differing beliefs, they all claim to be faithful to the Magisterium. Who’s to say they aren’t?

Cordially,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6396464:

No, they’re not. Some Catholics favor the Tridentine Mass

, and some favor the Novus Ordo Missae, which as been a bone of contention amongst Catholics since it was introduced four decades ago. Take some time to peruse some of the posts in the Traditional Catholicism forum and sooner or later you’ll discover Catholics vehemently disagreeing with each other yet each one claiming endorsement for his or her view from someplace within Catholic officialdom.

Well, at least you’re not claiming to be able to read their thoughts.

Contentedly,
Mick
:thumbsup:it is so, since the changes in the Mass. but this is beyond what we are talking about here.

I think it’s central to what we’re talking about here.

i favor the Latin Mass and pray for teh Come back. those who are against never really had the experience and are probably afraid because of the language. the Mass has pretty much the same elements.

Back in the 1970s, when I lived and worked in London, a Catholic work colleague attended a Novus Ordo Missae during his lunch hour. Some time later, he realized that he’d attended an Anglican service. Draw your own conclusion.

it is not divided in categories.

Yes, it is.

Definitely,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

What is the difference between the Old Roman Catholic Church in North America, the Old Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic Church?

I’m not sure which, but one does not recognize infallibility and primacy of the Roman Pontiff. One of them ordains married men into the priesthood.

the-american-catholic.com/2010/03/09/the-state-of-american-catholicism/

National Catholic Church of America?

nationalcatholicchurchofamerica.org/comparisons.html

Has a table showing their differences and similarities.

Many thanks for your contribution.

Gratefully,
Mick

 

[wisdomseeker]

Most Christians can assert as much without qualification but the Catholic Church has defined a hierarchy of sins categorizing some sins as mortal sins and other sins as venial sins. Nobody else in Christendom does this.

Observantly,
Mick

True. the CC stands alone.

the Bible talks about the morals sins and sins that are not mortals.

can you say that stealing a candy bar from the store is a sin?
can you say that a man who rape a child and kill her is the same as stealing a candy bar form a story? i have a protestant friend who told me it is the same thing. not to me.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Yes, analysis. And quite a detailed one, too.

I’m not sure slander is the correct word.

Ah, now I can see the faux pas. You typed slander but you meant evangelism.

No, it isn’t.

Yes, they do. Aren’t Catholics supposed to do the same thing apropos Non–Catholics?

The opposition would probably not only suggest that their success was fortunate but that it was the result of God working behind the scenes in their favor.

Non–Catholics make similar sheep/wolves assertions.

Except for the wise ones, like Larry the Lamb.

Perhaps. But it’s also possible that there might exist other people who sincerely believe something different from you.

How do you know what other people are feeling?

No, they weren’t. One has to take account of the development of doctrine in the Catholic Church.

Everybody has to make decisions about what is true and what is untrue.

Only if one has decided beforehand that the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth.

Perhaps some people sincerely believe that the Catholic Church has fallen into error and teaches extra–biblical doctrines that are false?

So be patient, then. Refrain from impatient jibes such as, “they refuse to see what is True,” and “from the beginning protestants have done nothing but to slander the CC.”

Some might say that those who have orchestrated changes in the spirit of Vatican II have met with a fair degree of success

That’s good news.

I’ve read about them in the Bible.

I disagree. The pre–conciliar Catholic Church is not the same as the post–conciliar Catholic Church.

But there are different categories of Catholics.

And, despite their differing beliefs, they all claim to be faithful to the Magisterium. Who’s to say they aren’t?

Cordially,
Mick

the different categories wihin the CC is that one spoken by Jesus. let the weeds grow with the wheat until the end. that you see. those who tought that the weeds were to much for them, decided to leave and form a religion without these weeds. what do you see today? they decided could do better than Jesus.

protestants instead of looking for the Truth, they busy themselves in finding fault with the CC. they sure are going to find it. this reminds me of St Paul: seek the good and you shall find, seek the bad and you shall find.

blessings.

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6399187:

Most Christians can assert as much without qualification but the Catholic Church has defined a hierarchy of sins categorizing some sins as mortal

sins and other sins as venial sins. Nobody else in Christendom does this.

Observantly,
Mick
:thumbsup:True. the CC stands alone.

Which doesn’t necessarily mean that the Catholic Church is right. One could be in a minority of one and still be correct, of course, but it’s equally likely that the majority would be correct.

the Bible talks about the morals sins and sins that are not mortals.

The Bible refers to sin that is deadly and sin that is not deadly. 1 John 5:16, the verse usually posited by Catholics to endorse the Catholic doctrine that categorizes some sins as mortal sins and other sins as venial sins, states:

If anyone sees his brother sinning, if the sin is not deadly, he should pray to God and he will give him life. This is only for those whose sin is not deadly. There is such a thing as deadly sin, about which I do not say that you should pray.

can you say that stealing a candy bar from the store is a sin?

Yes.

can you say that a man who rape a child and kill her is the same as stealing a candy bar form a story?

No.

i have a protestant friend who told me it is the same thing. not to me.

Your friend’s opinion hardly seems relevant but I think it might be helpful if I were to remind you that there are as many categories outside the Catholic Church as there are inside it so I respectfully suggest that you’d probably be wise to conclude that your friend probably isn’t in a position to speak authoritatively for everybody inside Non–Catholic Western Christendom. In any case, is it possible that you might have misunderstood your friend’s explanation?

Peaceably,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher;6399191:

Yes, analysis. And quite a detailed one, too.

I’m not sure slander

is the correct word.

Ah, now I can see the faux pas. You typed slander but you meant evangelism.

No, it isn’t.

Yes, they do. Aren’t Catholics supposed to do the same thing apropos Non–Catholics?

The opposition would probably not only suggest that their success was fortunate but that it was the result of God working behind the scenes in their favor.

Non–Catholics make similar sheep/wolves assertions.

Except for the wise ones, like Larry the Lamb.

Perhaps. But it’s also possible that there might exist other people who sincerely believe something different from you.

How do you know what other people are feeling?

No, they weren’t. One has to take account of the development of doctrine in the Catholic Church.

Everybody has to make decisions about what is true and what is untrue.

Only if one has decided beforehand that the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth.

Perhaps some people sincerely believe that the Catholic Church has fallen into error and teaches extra–biblical doctrines that are false?

So be patient, then. Refrain from impatient jibes such as, “they refuse to see what is True,” and “from the beginning protestants have done nothing but to slander the CC.”

Some might say that those who have orchestrated changes in the spirit of Vatican II have met with a fair degree of success

That’s good news.

I’ve read about them in the Bible.

I disagree. The pre–conciliar Catholic Church is not the same as the post–conciliar Catholic Church.

But there are different categories of Catholics.

And, despite their differing beliefs, they all claim to be faithful to the Magisterium. Who’s to say they aren’t?

Cordially,
Mick
:thumbsup:the different categories wihin the CC is that one spoken by Jesus. let the weeds grow with the wheat until the end. that you see. those who tought that the weeds were to much for them, decided to leave and form a religion without these weeds. what do you see today? they decided could do better than Jesus.

I note that you’ve now come around to accepting the view that there indeed are categories within the Catholic Church so it seems that progress is being made. However, as to the parable of the weeds in the field, which you appear to be employing to endorse your stance, I consider it incumbent upon me to point out that this is one of the parables that Jesus explained and that in His explanation He made no mention of the Catholic Church (cf. Matthew 13:37–43). It appears, then, that you are reading into this parable your own subjective latter–day bias. This is called eisegisis and most of the people I’ve met who know their way around the Bible consider it to be a practice that is less than helpful.

protestants instead of looking for the Truth, they busy themselves in finding fault with the CC. they sure are going to find it.

Which “protestants” do you have in mind? Contrary to your unsubstantiated assertion, isn’t it possible that the people to whom you are referring hold truth to be the most important thing of all but that after the fullest and fairest consideration have come to the conclusion that the Catholic Church is wayward and has fallen into error? If such were their sincere belief wouldn’t they be required to follow their consciences? Doesn’t the Catholic Church teach as much?

this reminds me of St Paul: seek the good and you shall find, seek the bad and you shall find.

Here’s another reminder.

Therefore, do not make any judgment before the appointed time, until the Lord comes, for he will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will manifest the motives of our hearts, and then everyone will receive praise from God.

Saint Paul​

blessings.

Blessed be the name of the LORD, henceforth, and forevermore.

Affably,
Mick

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Spock’s Brain is just in that Plan Nine from Outer Space category! You want to watch it at midnight with popcorn ready to laugh. I don’t know which is funnier, Spock walking around with a cheesy remote control and that deadpan look on his face with the click-click-click sound or the morg women who lived under the ground in caves with the bubble-brain bimbo personalities. The dialogue was hilarious, too. Then there was the hair salon hair dryer with spikes “the teacher” head set lol…

I actually liked the Next Generation. After that, I hated the rest of the incarnations. I’ve met a lot of the cast of the original and NG series. Big fan. Dr. McCoy’s the greatest!~

With the exception of the episode titled, Spock’s Brain, I’m a fan only of the original series. The follow up stuff (Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space) caused me to lose interest.

Sadly,
Mick
:sad_bye: