- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Docilic Catholics (Required)...
In Catholicism, one is either Catholic or not. At least from the perspective of the Catholic Church. A Catholic just swallows whole ("with docility") whatever the RC Denomination itself exclusively says (officially, AT LEAST) because the Catholic Church teaches it. And IF a person does that, IF they parrot that, true or false, right or wrong. IF they do that, they are Catholic. If they don't, they aren't. Simple.
Here is what the Catholic Catechism specifically, verbatim, flat-out states: "Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me", the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their Catholic pastors give them in different forms." And as a former Catholic, I can assure you this is DRILLED into Catholics from birth.
As our Catholic Deacon so stressed, in the pews of Catholic churches, we find 3 groups of people:
1. CATHOLICS. They acknowledge and accept that the [Roman Catholic] Church is (in official matters anyway) THE Voice of God - infallible and authoritative. When IT speaks (exclusively, singularly, institutionally, officially) God Himself therefore speaks. They do NOT ask "is it true?" They ask, "Do I accept?" They accept the 2,865 points of the Catechism "with docility" BECAUSE it's what the singular Catholic Church currently states (and thus Jesus states). These are the Catholics. He admitted these are very rare, even among the religious.
2. CAFETERIA "Catholics" These are not Catholics although they likely label themselves "Catholic" and may embrace many (if not nearly all) of the teachings of the specific, singular [Roman Catholic] church. But they accept them because THEY have concluded these things are good or right or true, NOT because the Authoritative Church says so. Thus, by definition, they are not Catholic. They TEND to accept things - until they conclude such is weak or wrong. They regard the [Roman Catholic] Church as potentially errant (even in matters of formal doctrine), they look to some authority other than the [Roman Catholic] Church, they appoint self as the arbiter. He stated that most in the pews fall into this group.
3. Protestants HIDING in the Church. Similar to above, but the above tend to do this without malice and often unintentionally. In some ways, they work in the opposite direction: Cafeteria Catholic tend to accept until shown lacking whereas Protestants Hiding tend to not accept until shown to be of merit. This third group - rapidly growing - may actually accept MORE teachings than Cafeteria Catholics but they've accepted them because they've ruled them as true - in a deliberate way that they know defies the authority and rule of the [Roman Catholic] Church. They treat the RCC as just another denomination - the one they choose because they agree most with it. They'll leave if they change their minds on that. Our Deacon called this group, "the greatest threat to Catholicism since Gnosticism" and note that it is by far the fastest growing group in Catholicism. He complained too that much of Catholic education these days actually "feeds" this dangerous heresy. He complained too that often RCIA classes aimed at Protestant converts tends to feed this.
Here is Catholicism. The exclusive, singular, individual, particular, RC Denomination speaks - and we jump. NOT because it's true or sound or right but because the RC Denomination is the AUTHORITY, the Vicar of God, the Mouth of God. Infallible, unaccountable. I recall a Catholic teacher speaking on some Catholic distinctive doctrine (I don't recall which) and I raised the issue of truth (I EVENTUALLY learned this is.... troubling to Catholics). The response I got was stern and very, very, very Catholic: "Josiah. If Jesus HIMSELF stood before you and told you something, would you ask Him if that was true? Of course not! So, how in the world can you even THINK to ask that of something the [Roman Catholic] Church tells you is true?" Ah. That teacher was Catholic. They are precious few of them.
When I realized I was not a Catholic, I finally conclude that it was a matter of honestly, integrity, character to not lie or knowingly deceive. I stopped labeling myself Catholic. And stopped regularly worshiping there. To me, it was a matter of honesty.... truth..... integrity.
Now, while the RCC rubric here is disturbing (any exemption from accountability by self alone for self alone is disturbing)... and while I reject that (in the RCC, LDS and wherever it's the rubric), I think the common alternative is just as dangerous, that each self sets up self alone as the sole arbiter of Truth; if it seems true to self ergo it is true (at least for self). Absolute authoritarianism is dangerous, so is absolute personal relativism. I think both extremes are to be avoided. But that's a topic I've explored here before.
In the Lutheran Church, we are asked if we accept the doctrines in Luther's Small Catechism (about 10 pages long, and about half of that is not doctrine) but NOT because the LCMS currently teaches it but rather because Scripture (and under that Tradition) teaches that - it's accountable to a norm outside and entirely other than the LCMS. It's a LOT (L.O.T.) less material than the 800 page Catholic Catechism... and accepted for a very different reason.
Blessings on your Lenten observation....
- Josiah (Former Catholic, now Lutheran).
.
In Catholicism, one is either Catholic or not. At least from the perspective of the Catholic Church. A Catholic just swallows whole ("with docility") whatever the RC Denomination itself exclusively says (officially, AT LEAST) because the Catholic Church teaches it. And IF a person does that, IF they parrot that, true or false, right or wrong. IF they do that, they are Catholic. If they don't, they aren't. Simple.
Here is what the Catholic Catechism specifically, verbatim, flat-out states: "Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me", the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their Catholic pastors give them in different forms." And as a former Catholic, I can assure you this is DRILLED into Catholics from birth.
As our Catholic Deacon so stressed, in the pews of Catholic churches, we find 3 groups of people:
1. CATHOLICS. They acknowledge and accept that the [Roman Catholic] Church is (in official matters anyway) THE Voice of God - infallible and authoritative. When IT speaks (exclusively, singularly, institutionally, officially) God Himself therefore speaks. They do NOT ask "is it true?" They ask, "Do I accept?" They accept the 2,865 points of the Catechism "with docility" BECAUSE it's what the singular Catholic Church currently states (and thus Jesus states). These are the Catholics. He admitted these are very rare, even among the religious.
2. CAFETERIA "Catholics" These are not Catholics although they likely label themselves "Catholic" and may embrace many (if not nearly all) of the teachings of the specific, singular [Roman Catholic] church. But they accept them because THEY have concluded these things are good or right or true, NOT because the Authoritative Church says so. Thus, by definition, they are not Catholic. They TEND to accept things - until they conclude such is weak or wrong. They regard the [Roman Catholic] Church as potentially errant (even in matters of formal doctrine), they look to some authority other than the [Roman Catholic] Church, they appoint self as the arbiter. He stated that most in the pews fall into this group.
3. Protestants HIDING in the Church. Similar to above, but the above tend to do this without malice and often unintentionally. In some ways, they work in the opposite direction: Cafeteria Catholic tend to accept until shown lacking whereas Protestants Hiding tend to not accept until shown to be of merit. This third group - rapidly growing - may actually accept MORE teachings than Cafeteria Catholics but they've accepted them because they've ruled them as true - in a deliberate way that they know defies the authority and rule of the [Roman Catholic] Church. They treat the RCC as just another denomination - the one they choose because they agree most with it. They'll leave if they change their minds on that. Our Deacon called this group, "the greatest threat to Catholicism since Gnosticism" and note that it is by far the fastest growing group in Catholicism. He complained too that much of Catholic education these days actually "feeds" this dangerous heresy. He complained too that often RCIA classes aimed at Protestant converts tends to feed this.
Here is Catholicism. The exclusive, singular, individual, particular, RC Denomination speaks - and we jump. NOT because it's true or sound or right but because the RC Denomination is the AUTHORITY, the Vicar of God, the Mouth of God. Infallible, unaccountable. I recall a Catholic teacher speaking on some Catholic distinctive doctrine (I don't recall which) and I raised the issue of truth (I EVENTUALLY learned this is.... troubling to Catholics). The response I got was stern and very, very, very Catholic: "Josiah. If Jesus HIMSELF stood before you and told you something, would you ask Him if that was true? Of course not! So, how in the world can you even THINK to ask that of something the [Roman Catholic] Church tells you is true?" Ah. That teacher was Catholic. They are precious few of them.
When I realized I was not a Catholic, I finally conclude that it was a matter of honestly, integrity, character to not lie or knowingly deceive. I stopped labeling myself Catholic. And stopped regularly worshiping there. To me, it was a matter of honesty.... truth..... integrity.
Now, while the RCC rubric here is disturbing (any exemption from accountability by self alone for self alone is disturbing)... and while I reject that (in the RCC, LDS and wherever it's the rubric), I think the common alternative is just as dangerous, that each self sets up self alone as the sole arbiter of Truth; if it seems true to self ergo it is true (at least for self). Absolute authoritarianism is dangerous, so is absolute personal relativism. I think both extremes are to be avoided. But that's a topic I've explored here before.
In the Lutheran Church, we are asked if we accept the doctrines in Luther's Small Catechism (about 10 pages long, and about half of that is not doctrine) but NOT because the LCMS currently teaches it but rather because Scripture (and under that Tradition) teaches that - it's accountable to a norm outside and entirely other than the LCMS. It's a LOT (L.O.T.) less material than the 800 page Catholic Catechism... and accepted for a very different reason.
Blessings on your Lenten observation....
- Josiah (Former Catholic, now Lutheran).
.
Last edited:
