“Catholics make a big noise about anti-Catholicism being “the only respectable prejudice,” but whenever push comes to shove, it seems they know who the low man on the totem pole really is.”
Really? So, what Catholic clergyman is on the television saying equivalent things about Protestantism? God had to establish His own TV network to get any Catholic programming at all, and yet you would have it that we are higher on the totem pole than protestants?
There is one point to be made there, though: protestants also suffer the abuse of non-believers for our Lord’s sake. It makes me wish our separated brethren were less violent in their attacks on us.
“It’s always those Anglo-Saxon Southern Protestants—the very people who are an embarrassment to Christianity because of their Biblical literalism.”
So, do you disagree with Saint Thomas Aquinas when he says, “The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”?
“This country would be better off if all those liberal urban Catholics were “bigoted” Southern Anglo-Saxon Protestants.”
No, the truth is always better.
“The “one true church” sure toots its own horn, but it’s useless at actually changing anything.”
Here on FR, Catholics discuss the Church pretty much exclusively in response to attack, and do it for the most part moderately and modestly (excepting myself, I guess).
“While not a Protestant myself, I at least know something you don’t: that to a Protestant Catholicism (and Orthodoxy) simply make no sense whatsoever.”
Why do you think we don’t know that? As Archbishop Sheen said, “There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church—but there are millions who hate what they mistakenly think the Catholic Church teaches.”
You see, it looks like there is something of which you are unaware: the reason it makes no sense is because they misunderstand it, and many are conditioned to reject all reasoned discussion and explanation.
(Here’s a “what-do-you-call” joke.)
What do you call a protestant who understands Catholicism?
A catechumen.
“Why shouldn’t Protestants consider eighteenth century Methodists the people who brought Christianity to Ireland if they don’t even recognize your religion as Christianity at all?”
Facts are stubborn things. A story is told of Abraham Lincoln examining a witness in a trial, a man who was known to play word games and who had only a nodding acquaintance with the truth.
“How many legs does a horse have?” Lincoln asked in exasperation.
“Four,” the witness replied.
“And if one were to call the horse’s tail a leg, then how many legs does a horse have?” Lincoln pressed.
“Why, I suppose the horse would have five legs,” the witness said.
“No,” Lincoln said, turning to the jury. “Calling the tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg. A horse has only four legs, no matter what you call the tail.”
Protestants can “consider” and “recognize” as they will; the horse has four legs, and only four legs.
“It takes some gall for a religion that spent fifteen hundred years attacking Torah observance and claiming that G-d changed His mind about everything He had commanded to turn around and denounce anti-nomianism when it is opposed to a fake Judaism of your own invention.”
That’s some pretty confused argumentation there, but you should be aware that antinomianism is no part of Catholic theology.
Another thing: a person is entitled to accuse an institution only of actual transgressions, and only to the degree they actually occurred. The fact that bad things happened is not a license to exaggerate without limit.
“All the nasty little accusations of “bigotry” (a liberal word, btw)”
Taken over by the libs now, but a perfectly cromulent English word. For example, “The KKK members who committed acts of violence against Catholics because they hated their religion without understanding it could with justification be called bigots.”
“can’t change the fact that the “one true church” is way, way, way on the Left and into modernism on almost every issue”
Rather, you can’t change that into a fact through any amount of repetition. There is a contingent of Catholics, those whom Saint Pope Pius X called “enemies of the Church,” that fits your description, and would like to drag the Church to the left. However, the Church is not subject to that sort of dragging at the hands of mortal men.
They will soon be gone, and the men who take their places will right the Church once again.
“I’m sorry this frustrates you”
Is it in some way odd or disreputable that a person should be frustrated by continual false witness in a place that should be the home and refuge of clear thinkers?
I am sorry that you cannot understand my objection. The Fundamentalist Protestant criticisms you so object to come from the right. The criticisms of Fundamentalist Protestantism which you and your co-religionists continuously make on this forum (simple-minded, ignorant, bigoted, etc.) come from the left. I don't object to being told I'm "going to hell." I don't object being told that I am "of my father the devil." I very much object to being told I am a simple-minded fool by some over-intellectualized higher critical snob with the same attitude as an Ivy League elitist. Maybe you Catholics should try criticizing Protestantism from the right some day?
I wonder if the Spanish Inquisition employed your liberal vocabulary when criticizing "heretics?"
There is one point to be made there, though: protestants also suffer the abuse of non-believers for our Lord’s sake. It makes me wish our separated brethren were less violent in their attacks on us.
They're not your separated brethren. They are a completely different religion with a completely different worldview. By their standards, you are not a chr*stian at all. And by your standards they aren't chr*stians at all. The fact that Catholics trumpet their liberalism by considering Protestants their "brethren" is one of the things that shows how far to the Left Catholicism has slipped.
The idea that there is some amorphous concept called "historic orthodox chr*stianity" to which all self-identifying chr*stians other than mormons belong is garbage.
So, do you disagree with Saint Thomas Aquinas when he says, “The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”?
Perhaps you aren't up to speed on the latest scientific discoveries, so let me clue you in: A "virgin birth" is a scientific impossibility. So is resurrection from the dead. So is "transubstantiation." So is bilocation. None of these things is scientifically possible. Yet you believe in them while in utter hypocrisy subjecting the creation of the world from nothing to the scientific laws that we know today. There is, and can be, only one reason for this inconsistency: the former scientific impossibilities are "Catholic miracles" and are therefore all right. Young Earth Creationism is "Protestant" and therefore to be treated like a disease (after all, who wants to be associated with those people in the trailer parks?).
Cosmogony is beyond the realm of science altogether. It is strictly theological. Science has nothing to say about cosmogony.
I wonder why it is that good Catholic intellectuals are never embarrassed by peasant folk Catholicism? Even that notorious Biblical critic Hans Kung refuses to criticize it (since it's so "quaint"). It's really great to know that the "inclusive" Catholic Church has room for every kind of simple-minded piety except for that of those awful rednecks. And you know what? This attitude is no different from the attitude of liberals who laugh at redneck creationists while swooning in ecstasy at the thought of the superstitions of "indigenous pipples."
Your attitudes are straight from the Left. And so is that of your church.
If American Catholics voted their theology this country wouldn't be in the mess it's in. The only thing keeping this country--and you along with it--from the abyss is those "ignorant rednecks" you so look down on. Shame on you.
“This country would be better off if all those liberal urban Catholics were “bigoted” Southern Anglo-Saxon Protestants.”
No, the truth is always better.
You take Nancy Pelosi and the truth. I'll take Pat Robertson and good intentions.
Here on FR, Catholics discuss the Church pretty much exclusively in response to attack, and do it for the most part moderately and modestly (excepting myself, I guess).
Here on FR, Catholics respond to Protestant attacks by engaging in liberal rhetoric about "bigotry" and "intolerance" and other similar leftist buzzwords because apparently it's the only way they know how to react. Say what you will about Fundamentalist Protestants, at least they aren't liberals.
“Why shouldn’t Protestants consider eighteenth century Methodists the people who brought Christianity to Ireland if they don’t even recognize your religion as Christianity at all?”
Facts are stubborn things.
Yes they are. And it is a fact that by Fundamentalist Protestant standards, Catholicism isn't chr*stianity. And the only reason that you can accommodate Fundamentalist Protestants (while despising them) into your definition of chr*stianity is that your a multicultural leftist. And btw, people who have been trying to convert Jews for two thousand years have no business condemning Protestants for wanting to convert the Irish.
Why do you think we don’t know that? As Archbishop Sheen said, “There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church—but there are millions who hate what they mistakenly think the Catholic Church teaches.”
I spent six years in the Catholic Church and nearly went nuts trying to have it make sense. It doesn't.
You see, it looks like there is something of which you are unaware: the reason it makes no sense is because they misunderstand it, and many are conditioned to reject all reasoned discussion and explanation.
There is no reasonable defense of the position that Biblical law and ceremonial was abolished and replaced with "better" ones. Either the Biblical law and ceremonial are still in place or (G-d forbid!) they were abolished and replaced with an antinomian loophole. Every argument against the Torah works against Catholic ceremonial, and every defense of Catholic ceremonial is equally valid when applied to the Torah.
I apologize for having been born into the wrong ethno-culture and inheriting a belief in the wrong miracles. Had I been born into a family of illiterate Mayan peasants in Guatemala, doubtless you would look on my simplicity as a beautiful thing. But alas, I am a redneck, and mighty science must be marshalled in a vain attempt to turn the Book of Genesis (that awful anti-Catholic tract!) into a metaphor. I guess it's a good thing no illiterate Mayan peasant in Guatemala has ever heard of Young Earth Creationism. So their charming folk beliefs remain unadulterated.