What was your biggest disagreement on CAF

  • Thread starter Thread starter commenter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
My biggest disagreement is with the people who tried to establish a dichotomy between “real Catholics” and “fake Catholics”, and the fact that they appointed themselves as arbiters of who fell into which category.

The most egregious was a person who claimed and repeatedly insisted that Baptism didn’t make someone Catholic … even though the Catechism literally says “Through Baptism … we are incorporated into the Church”. This person also thought excommunication meant someone was no longer Catholic at all … even though excommunicates are still expected to fulfill their obligations to the Church (i.e. going to Mass and fasting on Lent).

It seems like only Traditional Catholics do this, too. For all their faults, liberal Catholics never say “so and so is a Fake Catholic”.
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
Ongoing? The use of the term Protestant as a description of theology and practice.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that and the assumption that Jack Chick’s theology reflects that of all Pr…er…I mean, Reformation related Christians across the board.

I bet it’s less than half.
 
Maybe around once or twice a year, in the five years I’ve been here, an OP — I suspect that it’s the same one every time, under different names — comes here to preach the “soul sleep” belief of the Seventh Day Adventists. My response has been to ask the simple question, “@Username, are you a Seventh Day Adventist?” and when he replies in a long, rambling post that fails to give a Yes or No answer, a flag gets the thread closed within the space of an hour or two. It always works, every time. At first I found it annoying, but now it’s just routine.
 
People who think Catholics pay too much attention to Mary, “worship” Mary, put Mary above God, and/ or have some issue with the Rosary or some other Marian devotion or the Marian writings of St. Louis de Montfort or St. Alphonsus Ligouri, etc.
 
As a moderate conservative, I often argued with liberal Catholics in recent decades, but I seldom found any to disagree with on CAF.

I think the older generation of liberal priests and sisters never recruited like minded vocations, or many active in the Church laity. The older liberal Laity (thinking of my cousins for instance) raised children who are liberal, but not especially liberal Catholics. They aren’t particularly interested in what happens in the Church.

Just a guess about why CAF attracted some types more than others.
 
Last edited:
commenter said:
Yeah, that and the assumption that Jack Chick’s theology reflects that of all Pr…er…I mean, Reformation related Christians across the board.
Click to expand...
lol
commenter said:
I bet it’s less than half.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I had never heard of him until I joined CAF. Then again, I’m Lutheran which I suspect makes me a “cracker worshipper”, too.

My suspicion is his form of polemics represents a small minority of Pr…er…I mean, western non-Catholic Christians.
 
commenter said:
I disagreed with people who’d start out a post with “I know Fatima is Private, not Public Revelation, but …”
Click to expand...
No long-term disagreements I can recall, but I did always love OP’s who were absolutely sure of wrong or misunderstood things.

“I know we’re supposed to pray the rosary clockwise, but…”

“I know a marriage isn’t valid unless it is consummated…”

“I know babies should be baptized between 8 and 12 days old…”

Always brings out my socratic skills: “How do you know this? Who has taught you this?”
 
commenter said:
I had disagreement with Protestants on certain issues, some of which I think I was right on (sola Scriptura) others I was misinformed in, till @JonNC, @gkmotley and their ilk set me straight.

I also had disagreement with political and religious liberals, though I don’t think it led to much exchange of ideas.

My biggest conflict was with those who promoted, explicitly or implicitly, that group of “Trad” websites, not affiliated with the Church, as if they were Catholic ministries. I think they sow a hermeneutics of suspicion, that undermines the Faith, but I don’t think I got that point across.

On the other hand, with SSPX supporters, I think there was some genuine exchange of information and ideas, I think I see and respect their POV somewhat, even if I don’t completely share it.
Click to expand...
My most rancorous disagreements were with those who insist on God’s commanding of human violence, as in literalist fundamentalist interpretations of scripture.
And I’ll be completely honest and say I did not enjoy those discussions and I hope those holding that view of God’s nature come to the light.
 
Last edited:
Whatever the topic, there are basically two kinds of OP. Either (a) it’s a request for factual information, or (b) it’s inviting opinions on a controversial subject. Fine, that’s the way it should be, except that there are some smart alecks who disguise their (b)-type intentions by phrasing their OP as an (a)-type request. For instance, they quote a verse from one of the Epistles, asking “What does this word mean?”, and when a naïve poster trying to be helpful, like me, for instance, swallows the bait, they come back at you with “No, that’s not what the Church teaches.” I’m embarrassed to admit that I’ve fallen into that trap more than once.
 
JonNC said:
Are you saying you debated more intensely with someone else than me? 😳
I pity that person. 😁

Seriously, Paul, I’ve enjoyed our discussions.
Click to expand...
Jon, I’ve enjoyed our conversations and getting to know you. Your perspective has been appreciated.
 
On the old board, under my old name St Francis, biggest were on abortion–had a very long discussion which unfortunately kinda consumed me and led to my having to set boundaries on how long I would argue (not that I always remembered 😳), and many discussions on the Terri Schiavo situation.

I have had a few vigorous discussions on ABC but for the most part left vigorous discussions on these and religious topics to people who knew far more than I did. Their understanding and erudition was very impressive!
 
BornInMarch said:
It seems like only Traditional Catholics do this, too. For all their faults, liberal Catholics never say “so and so is a Fake Catholic”.
Click to expand...
Is this a “Traditional Catholic” thing, or just a foible of a subset of Americans who lean conservative?

Seems like both inside and outside the Church there’s always been a subculture of Americans concerned about purity tests and the naughtiness of others.

“I just listened to 8 hours of Fr. J. Martin and he says Catholics who go to the TLM are in grave error and we should withdraw from the our local church (which uses an organ) to attend only folk guitar Masses” said no liberal Catholic ever.

Kind of like liberals don’t listen to two hours of Whoopi Goldberg in the morning, watch two hours of her at night then get all, “Whoopi says Nancy Pelosi is a DINO!!!”
 
RobertAdams said:
Is this a “Traditional Catholic” thing, or just a foible of a subset of Americans who lean conservative?

Seems like both inside and outside the Church there’s always been a subculture of Americans concerned about purity tests and the naughtiness of others.
Click to expand...
No. Instead there is a subculture of liberals who say all is equal and relative, and all is good. They’re both extremes, just in different ways.
 
Last edited:
Fauken said:
No. Instead there is a subculture of liberals who say all is equal and relative, and all is good. They’re both extremes, just in different ways.
Click to expand...
“No instead…” and “They’re both…”

Which is it 🙂
 
Usually it’s been over the most basic question of what actually makes a person right or just in the eyes of God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top