I am curious, Radical. Since you are so sarcastic and critical about the Catholic faith, what are you doing on CAF?
I’ll give you the long-winded answer…and who knows, maybe my reason for being here might be similar to the reason why Cafeteria Catholics stay in the CC. (I seem to recall that being the topic of the thread). First I am here to discuss matters with Catholics and have indeed learned a few things in the process. One of the things that I have learned is that, not all, but a good percentage of the conservative Catholics on this site tend to make assertions that fall into the following five groups:
a) positively expressed: only the CC has the fullness of truth; or negatively expressed: your non-Catholic view of the truth is flawed;
b) the only good reading of scripture validates all Catholic beliefs; your non-Catholic reading of scripture is flawed;
c) the only good understanding of Church history validates all Catholic beliefs; your non-Catholic understanding of history is flawed;
d) to be informed is to be Catholic; to be non-Catholic is to be ill-informed, pig-headed or both (and if you don’t accept my explantion, then you are anti-Catholic); and
e) if you are Protestant, then you must believe this patently ridiculous thing.
(Let us call the Catholics who make assertions (a)-(e) the AC (for assertive Catholics). I have also learned that a conservative Catholic can make very similar assertions, but can do so in a much more charitable fashion. These assertions look like this:
- only the CC has the fullness of truth; it is my opinion that your non-Catholic view of the truth is lacking;
- the best reading of scripture validates Catholic beliefs; it is my opinion that your non-Catholic reading of scripture is not as good;
- the best understanding of Church history validates Catholic beliefs; it is my opinion that your non-Catholic understanding of history is not as good;
- both Catholics and non-Catholics can present informed, sound arguments for their views from scripture and history…my faith leads me to the Catholic view; and
- if you are Protestant, then do you believe this thing (which seems wrong to me)?
Let’s call the Catholics who make assertions (1)-(5) the RC (for Radical’s Catholics as I really enjoy discussing matters with them).
I don’t possess a disdain for the CC or for the conservative Catholic…I have no hesitation in calling the Catholic Church a good Christian Church (which is more than the Vatican will do WRT my church). I have no hesitation in calling a conservative Catholic my full brother in Christ (w/o a diminishing qualifier such as “separated”). What I have a solid dislike for is the hostile manner in which assertions (a)-(e) are made repeatedly in these threads. I tend to respond (in kind) to those assertions with: “No, my view is not flawed…and no, your understanding is not the
only good one and, in fact, there are these problems with your position.”
I think if that were true, he would not be leaking such an uncharitable attitude toward Catholicism.
Besides, he is not here to ask questions, or learn, he is here to make assertions against the Catholic faith. He does not want to see things from any different point of view than the one he already has. That is why I asked. I have been reading his posts for a long time now, and it is clear that there is nothing we can say to him that will enlighten him, or contribute to his learning in any way.
His posts have such a tone of disdain and sarcasm, it is hard to read them any other way
With respect to these charges please allow me to point out that I tend to respond on threads where the OPoster has asked for an opinion/defense from a Protestant. (In this thread, I believe Serap was happy to receive my opinion). Inevitably, the AC chime in and (from my POV) it seems that they tend to make their assertions with ever increasing force and hostility (if one doesn’t simply fold the tent and concede the field). In such a case I often respond with an almost equal and opposite assertion. Please note that in this regard:
i) my response won’t be quite “equal”, b/c I don’t claim to possess a monopoly on the fullness of truth;
ii)I’ll tend to tone it down a bit (ie Elvis used “your ridiculous charge” and I’ll tend to eliminate words such as “ridiculous”); and
iii) I’ll tend to work off the wording used by the AC to present the opposite POV (ie Elvis presented something WRT the history of the Church that he asserted was “glaringly obvious” and so I responded with some things that I thought were glaringly obvious).
Please note that I don’t have a problem with the RC as they find me to be respectful of their faith (see my discussion with Incomplete on this thread for an example @ #221…hopefully he doesn’t now regret that compliment
)…it is only the AC that seem to find me sarcastic or critical. It seems to me that it is my responding in kind to the AC and my mirroring of their assertions back to them that gets labelled as being “sarcastic”, “critical” “disdainful” and “uncharitable”…I can only wonder as to how it is that the “tone” is so wonderfully acceptable from them to me and how it is that the same “tone” is so utterly unacceptable going back the other way. It is MHO that among a good % of the Protestants here, there is an instant sense of brotherhood…not b/c we are Protestants and each reject some teaching of the CC, but b/c we are all subjected to the same hostility from the AC…If my post is sarcastic…the sarcasm is directed to the arrogance inherent in the assertions of the AC.
So then…in summary, I am here to respond when asked my opinion, learn from the RC, learn from the Cafeteria Catholic and defend my position when it is criticized by the AC. Perhaps I have described my tendencies a little too positively here…but I don’t think that I have.
