Recent trend in this forum that I'm seeing...is it just me?

[nickybr38]

Honestly, don’t you think that when a church tells the world that they are the One and only true church with all the correct doctrines, this church is open to all kinds of interactions from outsiders?

Sure much of it is uncalled for and wrong. However, as I tried to point out, churches ‘in glass buildings’ should not throw stones. Some of the ‘heat’ the CC gets is because of how it treats others of slightly differing understandings, IMO.

Doesn’t every Church believe they are the One and only true church…? No, wait, they don’t… because they have no conviction. They aren’t sure. There’s always that room for doubt.

I, personally, love Catholic bashing. When people start bashing the Church I challenge them. I confront them. We debate. I grow, they learn (and sometimes just get frustrated and roll their eyes) but either way if I wasn’t being confronted about my faith I’d know I was in the wrong faith. Many years I was a non-denominational Christian and people responded with; well, that’s nice. I was no threat so they just didn’t care. In the last few months since I’ve declared my desire to join the Catholic Church I’ve had nothing but catty comments, subtle attacks and questions. Lots and lots of questions. It’s kind of wonderful.

 

[Dokimas]

Doesn’t every Church believe they are the One and only true church…?

Incorrect and NOT for the sarcastic reason I’ll soon address directly. A Christian, true believer, should see themselves as part of the Universal Church that Jesus started. That’s the true church which no specific church has a right to claim.

No, wait, they don’t… because they have no conviction.

I very ignorant statement. I’m convicted that Jesus is God; that He became a Human, born to the virgin Mary. I am convicted that Jesus lived the only perfect Human life, did many wonderful miracles, went through several trials, was beaten for being the Truth, died hanging on a Tree (cross), was buried in a Tomb and was raised bodily on the Third Day.

They aren’t sure. There’s always that room for doubt.

You are welcome to your opinion even if it is wrong many times.

I, personally, love Catholic bashing.

I’m against it. Again, you are welcome to your opinion.

In the last few months since I’ve declared my desire to join the Catholic Church I’ve had nothing but catty comments, subtle attacks and questions. Lots and lots of questions. It’s kind of wonderful.

Sorry that things like this happens but it’s no reason to attack others now.

 

[puzzleannie]

For days, heck, weeks now I have been noticing people posting the most bizarre parish-level weird incidents that they can find. Whether it’s some obscure weird Canadian Anglican priest giving a dog communion or a “slinky service” at a Lutheran parish, it seems like many Catholics are trying to cite certain bizarre antics at a micro level and trying to claim, “see! see! this is what happens in the non-Catholic world! One more reason to join the Church!”

The problem with this is that Catholic parishes have bizarre priests who do weird things as well! Yet these don’t get discussed here.

.

I agree whole-heartedly with your first paragraph. It is unworthy of an apologetics website to make some crazy accusation about “Lutheran” or “non-denominational” worship. clergy, beliefs or practices based on outlandish internet or media reports of doubtful accuracy. There are forum rules in fact that govern discussions on this forum and they should be followed. It adds absolutely nothing to intelligent discussion of similarities and differences among Christian confessions to fling such nonsense about.

I disagree heartily with your second paragraph, since a simple search will uncover hundreds of worthless threads about weird things allegedly done by CAtholic priests or in Catholic liturgy. Try the traditional or liturgy forum under liturgical abuse. You will be amazed at the ignorance displayed by those who would not know true liturgical abuse if they saw it walking down the street. Those threads are IMO equally worthless and time wasting.

 

[nickybr38]

Incorrect and NOT for the sarcastic reason I’ll soon address directly. A Christian, true believer, should see themselves as part of the Universal Church that Jesus started. That’s the true church which no specific church has a right to claim.

The universal church eh? This universal church here teaches that God has no problem with homosexuality. This universal church over there claims God hates homosexuals… that’s not universal.

I very ignorant statement. I’m convicted that Jesus is God; that He became a Human, born to the virgin Mary. I am convicted that Jesus lived the only perfect Human life, did many wonderful miracles, went through several trials, was beaten for being the Truth, died hanging on a Tree (cross), was buried in a Tomb and was raised bodily on the Third Day.

It’s very nice you believe all these things - but how did you learn these things? Which bible did you read?

You are welcome to your opinion even if it is wrong many times.

I don’t mind being wrong, but in this I’m not wrong - not all churches are listening to what God wants.

Sorry that things like this happens but it’s no reason to attack others now.

Having your faith attacked is a blessing. It’s a special little gift that forces a person to grow in their faith because they have to THINK about what they believe instead of blindly follow.

 

[Soldier_X]

Gurney, you’re absolutely right. And part of what makes it so weird is that these discussions are usually worded so awkwardly (and sometimes are more irritating than informative!). It’s like we’re trying to prove that we’re exclusively right by highlighting a case where someone else was…gasp…*wrong *about something! Are we that petty? We’re not trying to one-up each other; why celebrate the worst extreme fringe of each Church? Do we really need to revel in the problems of another to justify ourselves or inflate our own egos?

Case in point - several of the Episcopal parishes in my region are quite traditional and orthodox. The badness of a few doesn’t reflect poorly on the good ones, nor is the overall faithfulness of the diocese necessarily a positive reflection on TEC nationwide (which, in turn, doesn’t reflect on the AC worldwide). It just is what it is, and I’m thankful to God for a place where I can worship Him in peace. He was even gracious enough to give me several parish options! How could I feel anything but gratitude? But, the sinful part of me likes to look at St. X Anglican or St. Y Lutheran or St. Z Catholic, point out flaws (while pretending that my own flaws don’t exist), and say “THAT’S why I’m not one of THOSE people!” In fact, in my younger days (and maybe not so long ago), I did that very thing. “I could never be Catholic because St. Z Church teaches/does this one thing that is strange.” Maybe they do. Maybe I can’t attend St. Z in good conscience. And maybe it’s only natural to base our perceptions of other Christian communities on what we observe…and strange/bad things remain in our minds more easily than good and wonderful things. But I know, deep down, that St. Z is an outlier. Why does it affect my opinion of other Catholics? Maybe because I secretly want it to do so? Because I want to prove that I’m right and they’re wrong? If that is indeed the motivation, it is a sinful one. Lord forgive me.

Will I say:

“God, I thank you that I am not like other men: extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.”

or:

“Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.”

Thank you, St. Paul. Maybe it’s time to do that and to quit pointing and laughing at other Christians.

 

[Dokimas]

Having your faith attacked is a blessing. It’s a special little gift that forces a person to grow in their faith because they have to THINK about what they believe instead of blindly follow.

Originally Posted by Dokimas
Incorrect and NOT for the sarcastic reason I’ll soon address directly. A Christian, true believer, should see themselves as part of the Universal Church that Jesus started. That’s the true church which no specific church has a right to claim.

Nicky: The universal church eh? This universal church here teaches that God has no problem with homosexuality. This universal church over there claims God hates homosexuals… that’s not universal.

Doki: The church Jesus started does not teach homosexuality is okay. The Universal church I was referring to is the church that contains all those who are part of the Family of God, the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ and has no specific name(s) other than that. The use of the term ‘universal’ means there are true believers all over the world.

Doki’s original: A very ignorant statement. I’m convicted that Jesus is God; that He became a Human, born to the virgin Mary. I am convicted that Jesus lived the only perfect Human life, did many wonderful miracles, went through several trials, was beaten for being the Truth, died hanging on a Tree (cross), was buried in a Tomb and was raised bodily on the Third Day.

Nicky: It’s very nice you believe all these things - but how did you learn these things? Which bible did you read?

Doki: The Book provided by God through His servants.

Doki’s original: You are welcome to your opinion even if it is wrong many times.

Nicky: I don’t mind being wrong, but in this I’m not wrong - not all churches are listening to what God wants.

Doki: I never said any church has all the correct answers. Quite the opposite: no ‘church’ has all the correct answers. We know in part until Heaven (1 Corinthians 13)

 

[nickybr38]

Originally Posted by Dokimas
Incorrect and NOT for the sarcastic reason I’ll soon address directly. A Christian, true believer, should see themselves as part of the Universal Church that Jesus started. That’s the true church which no specific church has a right to claim.

 

[Australis]

For days, heck, weeks now I have been noticing people posting the most bizarre parish-level weird incidents that they can find. Whether it’s some obscure weird Canadian Anglican priest giving a dog communion or a “slinky service” at a Lutheran parish, it seems like many Catholics are trying to cite certain bizarre antics at a micro level and trying to claim, “see! see! this is what happens in the non-Catholic world! One more reason to join the Church!”

Hint, many Catholics don’t like protestants. It’s all propaganda peddled by a bunch of sour faced bullies who cross the street when they see a protestant coming along.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Nine, please read my opening first post and see me admit my foolhardiness in doing so. I already admitted as much…

I do mean this with the utmost kindness, and ask for both correction and forgiveness if I am wrong in this,** but wasn’t it not that long ago that you were posting about pagan services in the TEC, as evidence of the downfall of Anglicanism?**
While I don’t say this to excuse the multitude of posts on the topic, certainly you must understand the mindset behind it?

You are of course right that these incidents aren’t limited to any one Church, and don’t prove the church correct or incorrect, however the reaction of authorities to such things should be a concern to parishioners.

 

[OneAugustKnight]

I don’t think it is necessarily Catholics saying look and see what happens in a non-Catholic world, since we have our own problems a compare and contrast session would not be fruitful. The first thing I thought when I saw these stories is “Why is Christianity in America becoming so incoherent and strange?”

 

[JonNC]

Thanks for pointing this out - reminds me a bit of Jesus’ speck and plank remarks.

However, I think it must be said that Catholics under Pope Benedict XVI are making an honest attempt to return to liturgical orthodoxy. TEC isn’t doing that, my ELCA isn’t doing that, and so weird examples will keep showing up with more frequency. In the Catholic Church, I suspect that as the 60’s and 70’s generation of priests retires and Benedict’s reforms take hold, there will be fewer and fewer examples of liturgical weirdness.

You know, Jay, I thought all along that is silliness in Lutheran parishes was just the protestantization of American Lutheranism. Its almost consoling to know that others are experiencing it, too. Sort of misery loves company.

Hopefully, our new LCMS president will turn the trend, and Pope Benedict has.

Jon

 

[AmateurPianist]

None to report. It’s not an infallible religion since he didn’t get to pitch in the All Star Game and will not be a Cy Young winner this year (Ubaldo should end up with it)…

No love for Josh Johnson (since he is my fantasy team ace)?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

He’s definitely a stud to be sure. The dude struck out Jeter and Suzuki easily and was an all-star this year again. He uses three really solid pitches and is quite an ace. I just think Ubaldo is more impressive because of his age. Would I rather Johson get the Cy than Jimenez? Heck yeah! I hate ANYTHING on the Rockies team. That team is an NL West pain in the neck! LOL

No love for Josh Johnson (since he is my fantasy team ace)?

 

[Soldier_X]

He’s definitely a stud to be sure. The dude struck out Jeter and Suzuki easily and was an all-star this year again. He uses three really solid pitches and is quite an ace. I just think Ubaldo is more impressive because of his age. Would I rather Johson get the Cy than Jimenez? Heck yeah! I hate ANYTHING on the Rockies team. That team is an NL West pain in the neck! LOL

Rockies

 

[LDNCatholic]

The problem with this is that Catholic parishes have bizarre priests who do weird things as well! Yet these don’t get discussed here.

I wouldn’t expect to see them discussed in Non Catholic Religions, but when they are discussed it’s usually under the subject of liturgical abuse.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It’s just interesting how the Protestant freaks are exposed, the Catholic freaks are just considered exceptions to the rule, etc. Different rules for different denoms it looks like. just my observation

I wouldn’t expect to see them discussed in Non Catholic Religions, but when they are discussed it’s usually under the subject of liturgical abuse.

 

[Nine_Two]

Nine, please read my opening first post and see me admit my foolhardiness in doing so. I already admitted as much…

Sorry, I think I read your story and then skimmed/skipped the last paragraph because I somehow missed that.

Well you know why people do it, now we all just have to figure out a way to get people to understand that it doesn’t prove a thing.

 

[Michael_Francis]

That’s why this is in place.

Guidelines for posting on religious discussions

Members are not allowed to be disrespectful of anyone’s faith or religion, whether it is Catholicism or not. If a member is disrespectful, he will generally be counseled first and suspended if he persists in disrespectful postings.

If the nature of an initial posting is blatantly disrespectful to any religion (e.g., “the pope is the anti-Christ” or “Rome is the Whore of Babylon” or “Muslims are terrorists”), suspension may be immediate and without prior counseling.

Members are free to discuss, dialogue, question, disagree with, and debate the doctrines and dogmas of both Catholicism and non-Catholic religions. However, all discourse must be civil and charitable.

Guidelines
For both Catholic and non-Catholic posters:

• It is acceptable to question the doctrine or dogma of another’s faith
• It is never acceptable to question the sincerity of an individual’s beliefs
• Bringing up historical controversies peculiar to a particular religion should be done cautiously*
• It is acceptable to discuss the effect the incident had on current policy or practice.
• It is acceptable to seek the truth vs. commonly-held beliefs or conventional wisdom about actual events.
• It is fallacious reasoning to use embarrassing incidents to claim that they “prove” a particular religion is false.

• Expecting members of any Church to defend or answer for the excesses or extremism of bodies that have broken with it is a technique that has no merit and can’t be defended.

*It is our observation that discussion of such past events rarely serves a useful purpose and inevitably opens a thread to posts that violate forum rules and/or the bounds of civil discourse. So, while such threads may be useful, they raise a red flag for the Moderation staff.