Why are Catholics so intollerant?

[PJM]

Catholics don’t accept gay marriage, sex of any kind outside of marriage, abortion ‘rights,’ porn, contraception, divorce and remarriage, and a lot of other stuff that’s considered acceptable in the modern world. So we’re intolerant.

So if cathoics are holding “truthfull” positions, then it’s ok to be intollerant?

What does “remarriage” have to do with the other issues you mention?

And if people don’t agree with you… are they intollerant

God bless,

PJM m.c

 

[Teflon93]

So if cathoics are holding “truthfull” positions, then it’s ok to be intollerant?

What does “remarriage” have to do with the other issues you mention?

And if people don’t agree with you… are they intollerant

God bless,

PJM m.c

The surest sign of intolerance is the resort to scare quotes.

 

[PJM]

The surest sign of intolerance is the resort to scare quotes.

My dear friend in Christ,

As a fellow Catholic and Chrsitian, I simply asked what “remarriage” had to do with the litany of other sins listed.

It was not even a disagreement, only a question of clairification. No scare tatic, no threat, and no lack of charity intended.

I’d still like to understand the point of including this in the list. I’m open to learning something I don’t understand.

God bless you

PJM m.c.

BVM please lead us to your Son Jesus!

 

[JimG]

I mentioned “remarriage after divorce” simply because Christ, and Catholics, don’t recognize divorce. It doesn’t end a legitimate marriage, and thus “remarriage” has no effect. A putative marriage which has been declared null by the Church does not affect one’s ability to marry, since the earlier attempt at marriage had no validity.

The civil divorce rate is one example of tolerance at work, yet it has devastated society, and women, and children, and men.

 

[Teflon93]

My dear friend in Christ,

As a fellow Catholic and Chrsitian, I simply asked what “remarriage” had to do with the litany of other sins listed.

It was not even a disagreement, only a question of clairification. No scare tatic, no threat, and no lack of charity intended.

I’d still like to understand the point of including this in the list. I’m open to learning something I don’t understand.

God bless you

PJM m.c.

BVM please lead us to your Son Jesus!

Thank you for the clarification. Usually when folks around here put “truthful” in quotes regarding the Church they do so in a rather intolerant display—they are mocking the Church’s claim to possess the fullness of truth by the grace of God.

Since that was not your intent, I withdraw my objection.

As to your question, remarriage often follows divorce. It implies that the first marriage, which no man may split asunder, has indeed been sundered.

Such remarriages are simply adultery given state pedigree.

 

[Newbie2]

Tolerance is the virtue of a man with no convictions - G.K.Chesterton

Intolerance with discernment seems to a virtue, then.

 

[Teflon93]

One will have to show me where Christ was tolerant with the Pharisees or the Sanhedrin.

Gene Wolfe pointed out that Christ spent his formative years as a carpenter, yet the only thing Scripture tells us he fashioned was the scourge he used to drive the moneylenders from the Temple.

A man who will make his own whip will not be mistaken for a 21st century exemplar of “tolerance.”

C.S. Lewis had it quite right—he is not a tame lion.

 

[cascherman]

There is a difference between being tolerant and approving of evil.

Tolerance is what Jesus had for the prostitutes and tax collectors when he sat at table with them.

He did not approve of their behavior, he was looking to change lives through his love. I’m sure he didn’t say “The Father sent me to die for your sins, but keep them up or else I’ll have nothing to die for”.

Jesus did not approve to evil-doing by evil-doers. He simply knew they were the ones who needed his help the most.

That is what Catholics need to do, and that is what many Catholics and protestants do do. People call it intolerance because they don’t want to stop doing what they are doing, not because they actually believe we are being intolerant. They want us to approve of what they do. In my opinion, at least.

 

[PJM]

I mentioned “remarriage after divorce” simply because Christ, and Catholics, don’t recognize divorce. It doesn’t end a legitimate marriage, and thus “remarriage” has no effect. A putative marriage which has been declared null by the Church does not affect one’s ability to marry, since the earlier attempt at marriage had no validity.

The civil divorce rate is one example of tolerance at work, yet it has devastated society, and women, and children, and men.

Thanks,
I’m in complete agreement with you:thumbsup: Somehow I missed the word “divorce” in the 1st. post. My fault:blush:

God bless, Pat

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Are we “intollerant?”

If we are why are we?

If we are not, why is there a preception that we are?

Do folks pick on Catholics because were are the bully on the block?

**In large part, yes - fortunately for all concerned, the Church is no longer in a position to burn or butcher those it does not care for. Unfortunately, the bullying instinct is alive & well among others too. **​

**One man’s intolerance is another’s holy severity - so intolerance can be relativised by those who approve of it into exemplary Christian behaviour; which degrades faith in Christ by distorting its moral character. Christ was a lot of things, but He was no promoter of Holy Offices or other forms of religious repression; love is many things, but when it becomes compatible with murder it has been satanised **

**This happens because intolerance forgets human beings in its zeal for ideas - so human beings are easily sacrificed (with a clear conscience) to ideas. But Christ is not a set of ideas - He is a Person. Only persons can love, just as only persons can respond to love. To give ideas first place is to corrupt Christian faith entirely Jesus did not test people by their holding the right doctrinal ideas, but by their actions. Unfortunately, it is easier for a community to test ideas than to test people - & this affects entry into a community. **

BTW - the word is intolerant

God bless you and your’s

PJM m.c.

**Perhaps because Judaism was intolerant in some ways - this would then be something that the Church inherited. **​

 

[Phillipos]

When I was a protestant some people on EWTN and Catholics I knew came off not as intolerant but with this “Im better then you” feeling about them. All it seemed I heard was, “Im a Catholic. You’re not. Im really a Christian. You’re not.”

Of course on the flip side plenty of Protestants do the same thing to Catholics.

 

[PJM]

**One man’s intolerance is another’s holy severity - so intolerance can be relativised by those who approve of it into exemplary Christian behaviour; which degrades faith in Christ by distorting its moral character. Christ was a lot of things, but He was no promoter of Holy Offices or other forms of religious repression; love is many things, but when it becomes compatible with murderr it has been satanised **

Outstanding post, and your reference to “murder” is apt. It does seem at times that misplaced zeal assumes the role of an assassin, although not intentionally.

**This happens because intolerance forgets human beings in its zeal for ideas - so human beings are easily sacrificed (with a clear conscience) to ideas. But Christ is not a set of ideas - He is a Person. Only persons can love, just as only persons can respond to love. To give ideas first place is to corrupt Christian faith entirely Jesus did not test people by their holding the right doctrinal ideas, but by their actions. Unfortunately, it is easier for a community to test ideas than to test people - & this affects entry into a community. **

Indeed this is true, but one might ask WWJD today? Their was no doctrine, do dogma, as these begain as word of mouth, and personal experience accounts.

Your point for a consant awareness for charity is right on, still we now do have Sacred Tradition, Doctrines and Dogma’s, and of course our Catholic bible. Indeed, the RCC is the requary for All truth on the topics of Faith and Morals.

So are we to risk being “intollerate” in defence of these truths, or do we “soft-pedal” them so as not to seem, or not to actually be intollerant?

Perhaps because Judaism was intolerant in some ways - this would then be something that the Church inherited.

I hadn’t thought of this point either. Well done. Certainly, habits, both bad and good are hard to break.

So how does one share the truth (as the holders of truth) when so many have their “own truth” which, one assumes they too think is the single truth?

God bless you, and thanks for such a great post:clapping:

PJM m.c.

BVM please lead us to your Son!

 

[Eugene_v]

Are we “intollerant?”

If we are why are we?

If we are not, why is there a preception that we are?

Do folks pick on Catholics because were are the bully on the block?

God bless you and your’s

PJM m.c.

Well…Yes and No. We are on Religious issues such as Non-Catholic Religions. But with people, no! We love everybody! Just as Jesus did.

 

[Pier]

Haven’t read all the posts, but just want to say that Catholicism may be perceived as being intolerant, even though it is all inclusive; everyone is welcome, always - this is Christ’s Church & His message…

However, our behavior (to sin or not to sin) - is more what I believe you are referring to. No, the Catholic Church will not okay sin just because it may be in fashion. We are all indeed sinners, & are all welcome. But we also have to make an effort to do what God wants. Grace from the sacraments is there to help us do it, too! :yup:

 

[cascherman]

Haven’t read all the posts, but just want to say that Catholicism may be perceived as being intolerant, even though it is all inclusive; everyone is welcome, always - this is Christ’s Church & His message…

However, our behavior (to sin or not to sin) - is more what I believe you are referring to. No, the Catholic Church will not okay sin just because it may be in fashion. We are all indeed sinners, & are all welcome. But we also have to make an effort to do what God wants. Grace from the sacraments is there to help us do it, too! :yup:

Great answer. I think this is the gist of what most are trying to portray.

Being intolerant, in the negative way, is directed at a person not his actions.

 

[Salonika]

The Church is not intolerant. After all, we are all sinners, aren’t we?

No, the Church is unwavering, inflexible, immovable and unshakable on some matters, and her confidence seems to unnerve those people who aren’t comfortable with such certainty.

Some of us are very, very wary of ANY organisation or person who considers that they have the monopoly on truth especially when they consider that their task is to bring everyone to that truth.

We seen from history what can happen when such organisations have power, especially absolute power.

And yes, we consider and find such organisations intolerant however tolerant some of its members may be.

 

[Lainey63]

Many times I think the only people who think Catholics are intollerant are fallen away Catholics. Oh the Catholic church this…why should I confess to a man-the catholic church has some much money why don’t they sell some of their treasures and help the poor. It goes on and on! I live in FL and there are all kinds of religions here-having grown up in RI where the majority is Catholic this was new to me. Having to listen to how catholics are idol worshippers, people cutting down my religion in order to build their own up etc. I am usually quite tolerant but I am getting to the point that I am quite sick of hearing it. One of these days my Irish is going to take over-

 

[Aboveallbereal]

The concept of “Tolerance” is misunderstood.

Toleration properly understood implies a standard of behaviour that the tolerated behaviour fails to meet. Tolerance implies a liberal ( in the best sense) compassion and understanding but does not imply that the standard is done away with.

One will understand the non catholic view of Catholicism on this issue better if one repleces toleration with “licence” as their preferred response to moral issues

 

[PJM]

Some of us are very, very wary of ANY organisation or person who considers that they have the monopoly on truth especially when they consider that their task is to bring everyone to that truth.

We seen from history what can happen when such organisations have power, especially absolute power.

And yes, we consider and find such organisations intolerant however tolerant some of its members may be.

It seems to me my friend in Christ, that your over looking one very obvious fact. On any single issue, there can only be ONE TRUTH.

Pope Benedict pointed this out in his Papal acceptance homily.

“There cannot be my truth and your truth or their would be no truth.” Common sense.:yup:

The RCC,as the only Church founded by Jesus Christ, gave His very life in assurance that all Faith ans Moral Truth’s reside in His RCC.

So are we to risk not sharrin the truth, God’s truth, inorder not to be seen as intollerant.

And is "intollerance, necessarily tied to a lack of Charity.?

 

[Teflon93]

Christ has a monopoly on truth, and he founded the Catholic Church so that people would know where it was to be found.

Christ certainly could have instead written the New Testament, but left that to the Church.

Which leads us to ask once again why Protestants chose to follow Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli instead of the Bride of Christ.