Is it better to be a Christian or a Catholic?

[Jeanette_L]

I avoid using the “30,000” denominations. What are you going to say if someone asks list them? You would be hard pressed to do so. I say that there are hundreds if not thousands of Protestant demoninations and variations of Protestant denominations. Lets list a few, Lutheran, Methodist, …Independent Baptist, Southern Bapitist, and I list about 10 or 12. IT gets the point across without using this huge number that is too hard to grasp.

Although I agree with you, I had to laugh because a few years back when I was beginning my search which led me to Catholicism, I had picked up a book on American Christian Denominations. The premise was to have an updated list of churches, a brief summary of their roots in Christianity, and a summary of their current beliefs. Now I was very serious about trying to find the church out there that had it all together, you know? I was tired of searching and church hopping and I needed this matter settled. And I thought this book was going to do it for me.

I managed to get through maybe the first 100 pages, and then I threw it down in disgust. I had been a practicing Christian my entire life and couldn’t make heads or tales out of this mess, how in the world could a new Christian convert ever figure this out? I knew something was seriously wrong with this picture.

It was only a matter of a very short time after that, (and many books and prayers and tears) that the Catholic Church became the only **Christian **Church for me!

 

[mtk76]

This is a good example of what someone above said around just confusing the issue more. It was a perfect opportunity to say something to make it crystal clear that Catholicism is the foundation of Chrisitianity and its most fertile soil(to use the sowers parable). This kind of comment below probably left people more confused and more prone to saying to fundamentalist quesitoning I am a Catholic not a Christian vs. my preferred answer of I am a Catholic which is the fullness of Christianity because it was founded by Christ himself through the Apostles he appointed.
Peter & Paul pray for us.

Here’s the rub… and I guess I left this point out earlier. He stated that one young boy answered “Christian”. He asked him why and the boy said that by being a good Cristian, it would make you a better Catholic. The priest then wrote about how this was such a “profound” thought coming from the mouths of babes. So he apparently did leave this boy and the rest of the group with the impression that “Catholic” is a type of Christian.

Therefore I can draw no other conclusion but that we have a problem understanding that Catholic and Christian are synonyms. But unfortunately you see the phrase Catholic Christian used by modernists who cite the very document of Vat II that I cited. Now, damage control comes in and we have to “prove” that this new definition is in line with tradition according to Cardinal Ratzinger. The problem here is that there was never any need in the past to change the definition. The statement, “The Church of Christ IS the Catholic Church” is a concrete, non negotiable statement where as the same statement with phrase “subsists in” substituted for the word “IS” makes the meaning of the statement ambiguous and can be interpreted in different ways.

 

[Mikel12]

A Chrisitan who is not a Catholic has settled for a pale shadow of the truth. why settle for less?

Amen to that.

 

[Atreyu]

Here’s the rub… and I guess I left this point out earlier. He stated that one young boy answered “Christian”. He asked him why and the boy said that by being a good Cristian, it would make you a better Catholic. The priest then wrote about how this was such a “profound” thought coming from the mouths of babes. :banghead: So he apparently did leave this boy and the rest of the group with the impression that “Catholic” is a type of Christian.

Therefore I can draw no other conclusion but that we have a problem understanding that Catholic and Christian are synonyms. But unfortunately you see the phrase Catholic Christian used by modernists who cite the very document of Vat II that I cited. Now, damage control comes in and we have to “prove” that this new definition is in line with tradition according to Cardinal Ratzinger. The problem here is that there was never any need in the past to change the definition. The statement, “The Church of Christ IS the Catholic Church” is a concrete, non negotiable statement where as the same statement with phrase “subsists in” substituted for the word “IS” makes the meaning of the statement ambiguous and can be interpreted in different ways.

What is a heretic, Trady? Are they Christians? How do you define a Christian?

 

[rwoehmke]

At the time, he was not the holy father, he was a Priest/theologian. I’m not saying that I know more than anyone, but the fact is that up until that time, the Church of Christ was defined as the Catholic Church alone.

I suppose it depends a lot on who is doing the defining. It’s not like the Catholic Church was the only one around even before Ratszinger. I like big words like “subsists”. Sows confusion in the enemy camps. I have yet to meet a practicing Catholic who was confused about this matter of “Christian or Catholic.” Even back in the dark ages before 1965. So what is the difference between a Catholic and a Traditional Catholic? Is it like in Fiddler on the Roof?

 

[m134e5]

This question was actually posed by a Priest to a group of kids. I was interested in hearing the CAF posters response to this question. More importantly, I’d like to hear your impression of the Priest who asked it to a group of kids.

If asked this question, you should say “It is better to be a Catholic Christian than a Christian of any other kind, because Catholicism has the fullness of truth.” (It is a shame that people are misinformed about their faith to have to ask this question).