Non Catholics? What bugs you the most about Catholics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dann
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dann

Guest
Non catholics… What bugs you the most about catholics?
 
Last edited:
dann said:
Non catholics… What bugs you the most about catholics?
Click to expand...
I am not responding to the word “most” necessarily but it would be helpful to me if the laity within the Catholic Church could be better informed by the hierarchy about what the Church currently teaches in relationship to non-Catholic Christians. It seems that a lot of the laity represented here are out of tune with the current thought of the hierarchy and ignorant of what they are now required to uphold.
 
Gorgias said:
Well… what bugs you about us? 😉
Click to expand...
That most that I talk to have no idea of what Catholics actually believe. And even when I tell them that that is not what Catholics believe, they refuse to believe that.

I will say that many non- Catholics on this site do not fit this generalization.
A smiley for that 😎
 
Last edited:
Their devotion to Mary. Other than that, they don’t bug me. I like catholics. 😀
 
The problem is that ‘the hierarchy’ themselves are currently ‘split’ in some directions. The Church doesn’t just ‘currently’ teach when it comes to matters of dogma and doctrine. The Church has been charged with not ‘making up doctrine’ but in transmitting, whole, entire, and unchanged, the dogma/doctrine of God (who does not change).

You’ll find that most Catholics know that disciplinary changes exist, such as a shorter pre-communion fast, an indult in the US regarding eating meat on Fridays outside of Lent, etc.

The ‘new current thought’ of some of the hierarchy however involving dogma and doctrine is in direct contradiction with the ‘continuous current thought’ of others. To give an example, consider two archbishops, of equal standing, one in Buenos Aires and one in Philadelphia. Both have spoken regarding a doctrinal matter (reception of communion among divorced/remarried without a decree of nullity). In Buenos Aires, the archbishop says “Yes they may receive”. In Philadelphia, the archbishop says "No they may not receive’.

Well, they can’t both be right. . .SO of the laity who support Buenos Aires and the laity who support Philadelphia, one group is going to be accused of 'being out of tune with the current thought of the hierarchy.

That is not the fault of the laity, who are trusting to their bishops and hierarchy. It’s not the fault of the archbishop who is upholding correct teaching.

It comes down to the archbishop who is (no matter how good his intentions are) supporting incorrect teaching. It is causing scandal to the faithful and a great degree of misery, and clear non ambiguous teaching and decisions are NOT being given.

That again is not the fault of the laity, nor the fault of those who strive to maintain correct teaching.
 
dann said:
Non catholics… What bugs you the most about catholics?
Click to expand...
Nothing.

I don’t agree with universal jurisdiction of the pope, but nothing bugs me about Catholics.

Except maybe those who regularly express a triumphalist attitude.
 
Not technically a Catholic but I’ll be entering RCIA soon;

Sedevacantists, though they are a minority, tend to bug me if I’m being honest…

Also: The Catholics that hate the sinner more than they hate the sin. It’s cruel and disheartening to see anger like that coming from anyone. This can apply to any Christian sect though, and most Catholics are of course not like this.
 
I think that is getting better. Remember Vatican II, that took like 50 years to trickle down.

But, largely due to the internet and other forms of communication, I think Catholics are better informed than they have ever been.
 
Well, I think if we’re getting under people’s skin, we’re doing something right. Jesus didn’t ride the fence. And God doesn’t want us to ride the fence.

I remember the days when Protestants really bugged me with their, “Are you saved?” question. It wasn’t until years later that I finally understood that they were trying to fulfill the Grand Commission.

I don’t think we need to imitate them, necessarily. But, when they ask that question today, we need to be prepared to answer it. If that bugs them, so be it.
 
Perhaps something like staring at them with a very confused look, saying “I’m…not dead yet, so I can’t quite say, as we’re judged after death. God knows.”
Might make them realize that their words don’t make much sense to those outside their in group.
 
Last edited:
**
“stpurl said:
The problem is that ‘the hierarchy’ themselves are currently ‘split’ in some directions. The Church doesn’t just ‘currently’ teach when it comes to matters of dogma and doctrine. The Church has been charged with not ‘making up doctrine’ but in transmitting, whole, entire, and unchanged, the dogma/doctrine of God (who does not change).

You’ll find that most Catholics know that disciplinary changes exist, such as a shorter pre-communion fast, an indult in the US regarding eating meat on Fridays outside of Lent, etc.

The ‘new current thought’ of some of the hierarchy however involving dogma and doctrine is in direct contradiction with the ‘continuous current thought’ of others. To give an example, consider two archbishops, of equal standing, one in Buenos Aires and one in Philadelphia. Both have spoken regarding a doctrinal matter (reception of communion among divorced/remarried without a decree of nullity). In Buenos Aires, the archbishop says “Yes they may receive”. In Philadelphia, the archbishop says "No they may not receive’.

Well, they can’t both be right. . .SO of the laity who support Buenos Aires and the laity who support Philadelphia, one group is going to be accused of 'being out of tune with the current thought of the hierarchy.

That is not the fault of the laity, who are trusting to their bishops and hierarchy. It’s not the fault of the archbishop who is upholding correct teaching.

It comes down to the archbishop who is (no matter how good his intentions are) supporting incorrect teaching. It is causing scandal to the faithful and a great degree of misery, and clear non ambiguous teaching and decisions are NOT being given.

That again is not the fault of the laity, nor the fault of those who strive to maintain correct teaching.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the explanation. On another thread a poster questions how all the Protestants can have differing views and still claim guidance from the Holy Spirit. Maybe they don’t have a monopoly on that!
 
Anytime a Protestant asks you if you’re saved, reply with this image:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The only way to even attempt to refute that would be to deny the New Testament.
 
Torolf said:
The better question would be “Do you believe in God and do you have an active relationship with Christ?”
Click to expand...
The way the Evangelicals would always pitch it to me is, “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior?” To which I can truthfully say, “Yes”.

Ever since I saw “Marjoe”, I plan to just respond with the answer he suggested his camera crew give if they were approached at the prayer meetings they were filming, “Yes Brother, I’m washed in the same blood as you.”
 
Note in all three, salvation is something happening to you, not by you.
I was saved.
I am being saved.
I hope to be saved.

Amen.
 
My now deceased priest said to say yes if people ask if you are saved and if they ask when say that you don’t remember the date but it happened on a Friday.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top