Anonymous wrote:The Catholic church as an organization has serious issues., from their admonition of nuns and Girl Scouts to abuse problems. I'm not going to pretend to agree with them to appear to not be bashing.

If you choose to support that organization, that's your choice. Don't expect me to act like they're doing all good because you believe in it.

I don't expect other people to act like anything when it comes to my church. Since I don't go around criticizing other churches that are no less corrupt, the endless criticism of the Catholic church seems odd, is all. What bothers me is the criticism of Catholics for being Catholic.

Yeah, I've noticed this trend as well, and I don't understand the sentiment.

And I agree to an extent with the poster who said that basing another religion - like Islam - would bring up stigma and violence. As a Muslim, I'm trying to ignore all the craziness going on because I really want to wring the necks of all the so called offended people retaliating over a frickin movie, ugh.

Anonymous wrote:I am Catholic and have from time to time been accused of "Catholic Bashing", even though I think I am making reasonable criticisms of the Church. Then when I say I am Catholic, I get the standard replies that I am not really Catholic. I interpret the reaction as defensiveness, and I think the Catholics on the board would get much more respect if they showed an appropriate level of concern for Church problems.

The other problem is that posters often enough respond with Church doctrine on certain matters of morality. To us, who are used to the language and have been reading this stuff our whole lives, it sounds reassuring and convincing. To outsiders with no background it sounds condescending and unconvincing. Take for example Women and the Priesthood. A typical response will be to repeat the standard doctrine about the "special" role women hold within the Church, and how "truly" beautiful it is when we realize the "fullness of God's plan". But when you take the documents apart with a critical eye, sometimes you realize that the source of the doctrine isn't biblical or philosophical. Ultimately it relies on the belief that the hierarchy is God's official representative on earth, designated by Jesus himself. And all of the poetry unravels for a person who does not share that single belief.

Jesus showed a healthy skepticism of the religious hierarchy when he was on earth. I suggest that we Catholics would do better for our church and earn the respect of outsiders if we do the same. Of course there are those who will always hate Catholicism, but those occasional bigots should not be the excuse for us to ignore real problems in front of our eyes.

But that belief is everything, PP.

The reason the Church is hated is because she claims that ultimate, total degree of authority: God's own authority, when talking about faith and morals. Without that authority, the Church is just another human effort to understand the Divine. With that authority, it is the ONE TRUE HOLY APOSTOLIC faith.

So the "poetry" is either just that--pretty words, lovely ideas--or it is REAL, the most real thing there is, the TRUTH.

This does not mean the Church, as an institution, is not populated by fallen, sinful human beings. But if Jesus told the truth, the Gates of Hell will not prevail against his Church. And if only people knew history better, they would know the Church has been gutted and rotted and attacked from within and without for centuries. Yet on doctrine and morals, it remains a constant, a beautiful, uplifting, affirming constant.

Jesus said over and over that his followers would suffer for their faith. He was talking to people from all times and places. He already knew every sin that would ever be committed, and he died for each one of those sins. And the higher the authority granted on Earth, the more responsibility entrusted, the more is expected--so those who abuse their authority here will face eternal justice.

But if Jesus was who he claimed to be (and if you are Catholic, you must believe in him), then he left behind an authority. You cannot have the Church without that authority. You can't reject the authority and keep the pretty stuff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. I have never met a Catholic I didn't like. 8) There are TONS of problems with the church, doctrine, and leadership, but the Catholics I've met are very down-to-earth. Well, except for one family that seemed almost fundamentalist-conservative, wearing Amish-like clothing. Still, they were nice.

Same for Mormons. I honestly think they are bat shit crazy for their beliefs, don't understand how in the hell they can believe this crap, and therefore question their intelligence. But I have never, ever met one that I didn't like. As a stereotype, they are incredibly nice people. Except for Mitt Romney. He's an evil dude.

Please explain how Mormons are any more bat-shit crazy than any other Christian sect.

I understand your point, and I agree with you for the most part. However, Mormon beliefs are a bit crazier than most religions. It was founded by Joseph Smith, a well-known con-man in upstate NY who claimed an angel gave him gold plates in 1820, they "baptize" dead people retroactively. Oh, I almost forgot: Glenn Beck is a converted Mormon. He is bat-shit crazy, so if Mormonism attracted him, it most be the nuttiest religion out there.

I wonder what additional information we would have on Jesus if he was around 200 years ago instead of 2000. Maybe we just have better records of all the kooky stuff Joseph Smith was involved in? And as far as "nutty": water to wine, virgin birth, rising from the dead? Being neither Mormon or Christian, they both sound equally nutty to me.

Glenn Beck. Case closed.

Rick Santorum. Reopened.

Seriously, PP, for every "crazy" mormon you can name, I can name 100 equally (or mor) crack maintsream christians.

The Catholic church as an organization has serious issues., from their admonition of nuns and Girl Scouts to abuse problems. I'm not going to pretend to agree with them to appear to not be bashing.

If you choose to support that organization, that's your choice. Don't expect me to act like they're doing all good because you believe in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually am thrilled that one can "bash" Catholics out loud. I agree with pp that if we were talking the same way about, say Jews or Muslims(yikes) or Chinese or Indian or whatever other such group, one would be out of line and likely bounced from the DCUM world by Jeff. But Catholics are now so mainstream, it's almost okay to bash them. Sort of like bashing a white male. No one is really offended. No one really cares. Wasn't that why when my grandfather was growing up, where Catholics were quite literally getting bashed. But Catholics are now mainstream, and such little "bashing" is either amusing, or doesn't really hurt.

This is just wrong. It is not ok to bash anyone, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, mainstream, fringe, or otherwise. It is, in fact, offensive, hurtful, and definitely not amusing.

Agreed. I've run into Catholic bashing in DC and elsewhere. Not always amusing. Here's a good rule of thumb: civilized people don't bash people.

I agree but I definitely think it's ok to criticize the Catholic church, because it is a institution trying to enforce a specific sets of doctrines (and on balance I don't think it is a good one). There is no comparable institution for Jews or Muslims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:17:14, why don't you start a new thread on what it means to be Catholic. This thread is on a different subject.

Yeah, this thread is for justifying stereotyping and bashing people of a certain belief system! Hoe dare you interrupt!!!

Well no. This is a thread for criticizing the stereotyping. I'm the poster who pointed out the Catholic bashing on the SUV thread, and that was my 2nd post on this thread (this is my 3rd).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also find it irritating--but Catholicism is a choice you make. Your race/ethnicity isn't.

Are you saying Judaism is a race/ethnicity?

Being Jewish is a choice. My friend converted from Judaism to Catholicism, for example. One of my Muslim colleagues turned her back on Islam b/c she had been beaten by her "high profile" husband. It's a choice.

It's not a race; it's a religion. I can be a French Jew, an Israeli Jew, an Egyptian Jew, you name it. So if I'm Ashkenazi, I'm European. If I'm Sephardic, I'm Middle Eastern.

Yes, it's "cultural" to some degree but so is being Catholic Italian, as they're interwoven - or Irish Catholic.

Religions are man-made. There's the choice. But I can't change my olive complexion or my brown eyes.

Practicing Judaism is indeed a choice. But for many people, there is a perceived racial/ethnic component to being a Jew. But that's a distinction that many bigots miss. Which is, after all, what this thread is about. If your last name is Steinberg, there are people who will automatically dislike you-even if there has t been a practicing Jew in you family in several generations.

Anonymous wrote:17:14, why don't you start a new thread on what it means to be Catholic. This thread is on a different subject.

Yeah, this thread is for justifying stereotyping and bashing people of a certain belief system! Hoe dare you interrupt!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also find it irritating--but Catholicism is a choice you make. Your race/ethnicity isn't.

Are you saying Judaism is a race/ethnicity?

Being Jewish is a choice. My friend converted from Judaism to Catholicism, for example. One of my Muslim colleagues turned her back on Islam b/c she had been beaten by her "high profile" husband. It's a choice.

It's not a race; it's a religion. I can be a French Jew, an Israeli Jew, an Egyptian Jew, you name it. So if I'm Ashkenazi, I'm European. If I'm Sephardic, I'm Middle Eastern.

Yes, it's "cultural" to some degree but so is being Catholic Italian, as they're interwoven - or Irish Catholic.

Religions are man-made. There's the choice. But I can't change my olive complexion or my brown eyes.

Well said. +1

Anonymous wrote:I actually am thrilled that one can "bash" Catholics out loud. I agree with pp that if we were talking the same way about, say Jews or Muslims(yikes) or Chinese or Indian or whatever other such group, one would be out of line and likely bounced from the DCUM world by Jeff. But Catholics are now so mainstream, it's almost okay to bash them. Sort of like bashing a white male. No one is really offended. No one really cares. Wasn't that why when my grandfather was growing up, where Catholics were quite literally getting bashed. But Catholics are now mainstream, and such little "bashing" is either amusing, or doesn't really hurt.

That is 100% untrue - and the attitude makes you look obviously ignorant.