"Catholicism is plenty fucked up, no argument here. But if you think Catholicism is stranger than Mormonism, you need to read more about Mormonism. Catholics at least doesn't have aliens and special polygamous planets for you after die. And Catholics come across as feminists compared to the Mormon treatment of women."
Funny, they want to mainstream so bad...and all their "lying for the lard" isn't going to fix this :)
In a contest between Mormons and Catholics for weirdness, I think Catholics win out. To be fair, they've been at it for 2,000 years now.
1) Their leaders are all men in dresses 2) They are required to confess every week. 3) They literally eat and drink the blood of Christ (Transubstantiation) 4) Stigmata 5) Worshipping of Saints, since you can't pray directly to God. 6) Men who aren't allowed to marry or have sex pontificating about marriage 7) Birth control 8) The Vatican is the largest, richest museum in the world 9) Nunneries and monasteries 10) Praying to icons 11) Lent 12) The Great Schism and the Babylonian Captivity 13) The Crusades 14) The Albigensian Crusade 15) Latin Mass 16) The Apocrypha 17) The current Pope was a member of Hitler's Youth who shot at Allied planes defending Hitler, but calls 21st C Atheists "Nazis" 18) Priests raping boys 19) Nazi Pope blaming priest boy rape on non-Catholic gay Americans 20) The Holy Inquisition
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/07/2011 07:21PM by axeldc.
axeldc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In a contest between Mormons and Catholics for > weirdness, I think Catholics win out. To be fair, > they've been at it for 2,000 years now. > > 1) Their leaders are all men in dresses Thge dress is traditional and not worn all the time.Men who are judges wear dresses as do boys who are graduating. So what? > 2) They are required to confess every week. No, they aren't. You confess when you feel the need > 3) They literally eat and drink the blood of > Christ (Transubstantiation) > 4) Stigmata. Many Catholics don't believe in stigmata and people who are not Catholics sometimes do > 5) Worshipping of Saints, since you can't pray > directly to God. You venerate saints and you can pray to God. Catholics do it all the time, Many prayers in the mass are directly to God > 6) Men who aren't allowed to marry or have sex > pontificating about marriage > 7) Birth control Most Catholics ignore that particular idiotic teaching > 8) The Vatican is the largest, richest museum in > the world, So? > 9) Nunneries and monasteries. Other religions have them too. Buddhists, Orthodox and Episcopal > 10) Praying to icons Catholics don't use icons. That is an Orthodox practice. They don't pray to statues either. The statue is a representation of Jesus, Mary etc and you use it as a reminder. You don't pray to it > 11) Lent Many Christians celebrate Lent. It is not an exclusive Catholic practice > 12) The Great Schism and the Babylonian Captivity. How is this different than the breal up into different sects when Joseph Smith died? Other churches have schisms too > 13) The Crusades > 14) The Albigensian Crusade > 15) Latin Mass The Latin mass was used because Latin was an international language. NB. It went out in the 1960s. The mass is now in the vernacular. > 16) The Apocrypha. So? They have some extra scriptures. Just like the Mormons. At least theirs are actually ancient writings > 17) The current Pope was a member of Hitler's > Youth who shot at Allied planes defending Hitler, > but calls 21st C Atheists "Nazis"Being in the Hitler Youth was a requirement and I have never heard the pope shot at planes. Sources please > 18) Priests raping boys, So do plenty of other poeple who aren't priests and they do it in about equal numbers > 19) Nazi Pope blaming priest boy rape on > non-Catholic gay Americans > 20) The Holy Inquisition
You have some true things listed and a lot of untrue things. Just saying
Thanks for taking this on for once. I am so sick of trying to correct posters to the board who really don't understand Catholicism and are just repeating stale cliches they heard "somewhere."
FYI--raised a Catholic. No longer one. But I'm not going to allow incorrect beliefs about Catholic dogma go unchallenged. It's just narrow-minded, lazy thinking.
Yes, I did read most of this "somewhere". The information on Ratzinger is readily available on the Internet.
My information on Catholic history I obtained by taking several courses in Medieval European history. You can't study the Middle Ages without studying the Catholic Church.
You failed to rebut a single point, instead dismissing the list as "rumors and cliches". That's like a Mormon calling you "apostate" and refusing to address a single criticism of Mormonism.
axeldc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes, I did read most of this "somewhere". The > information on Ratzinger is readily available on > the Internet. > > My information on Catholic history I obtained by > taking several courses in Medieval European > history. You can't study the Middle Ages without > studying the Catholic Church. > > You failed to rebut a single point, instead > dismissing the list as "rumors and cliches". > That's like a Mormon calling you "apostate" and > refusing to address a single criticism of > Mormonism.
There is a lot of crap readily available on the internet. Don't believe everything you read and check sources.
CateS Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > +1 > > Thanks for taking this on for once. I am so sick > of trying to correct posters to the board who > really don't understand Catholicism and are just > repeating stale cliches they heard "somewhere." > > FYI--raised a Catholic. No longer one. But I'm > not going to allow incorrect beliefs about > Catholic dogma go unchallenged. It's just > narrow-minded, lazy thinking.
I totally agree. Half my family is Catholic and the ignorance and prejudice is beyond belief. There are certainly legitimate criticisms, but most of these don't fall in that category.
Because after growing up Mormon in a 90% Catholic neighborhood, I found that I also knew FAR more about them and their history than they themselves could ever dream of.
Something like how most Mormons know absolutely nothing of their own cult's history...
axeldc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Please tell me which ones are untrue? > > I was never Catholic, but I served a mission in > France and took several classes on the middle > ages. I know more about Catholics than many > Catholics.
I did that already. I have taken classes and taught classes on comparative religions, my father was Catholic and I have been through RCIA and read the catechism. I stand by what I said. Go back and read my post. I pointed out exactly what is wrong
...and the religion is very full of misogyny and is great at inducing guilt. BUT there is no requirement to go to confession (although you are supposed to do it before receiving communion/the sacrament.) If you do go to confession, it is officially anonymous and entirely confidential. Priests take this obligation very seriously, and whatever you say in the confessional will never be divulged by them. "Church discipline" for sinning mostly consists of saying a set number of prayers. There are almost no excommunications, and no official tattling to the priest. There are no callings, and no required tithing for blessings (and Catholics are notoriously cheap.)
Also, due to the enormous world-wide number of Catholics, it is almost impossbile for the church to police for doctrinal fidelity among the membership. You have a wide range among believers from those who attend mass daily to those who go twice a year. And the latter will never be hounded or chased to go (or to leave) the church. There are tons of "cafeteria Catholics" as well, with little that the church can do about them.
There are no requirements in terms of visiting Catholocism's most majestic cathedrals. No "cathedral recommend" required! Even non-Catholics can tour and attend services in these lovely edifices. For sheer beauty and majesty, I dare the Mormon church to find any temple that approaches the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, the Notre Dame in Paris, St. Peter's in Rome, and many more.
As for the much maligned "praying to idols," Catholics pray to the person represented by the statue. Not the statue!
Although I have a preference for mainstream Protestant churches, on the whole I consider Catholocism to be far less damaging to the individual psyche than Mormonism.
Actually there is a requirement to go to confession once a year. If you haven't been to confession in the past 12 months, you aren't supposed to take communion. But it's all done on an honor system - no one but the parishioner keeps track. Needless to say, the Church encourages more frequent confession, but once a year is the requirement. The confession can be anonymous (through the screen) or sitting face to face - up to the parishioner. In my experience, the priest often won't look at you when listening to the confession, but will when talking or giving advice - which is beyond the sacrament as you're officially only there to confess sins, make an act of contrition (prayer) and receive absolution.
As for the praying to Mary or other saints, I'm not sure if praying is the correct verb. Catholics obviously pray to God, and the way I've always understood it is when talking/praying to a saint it's only to ask for intercession to God. Even the "Hail Mary," if you think about what the words actually say, is asking Mary to pray to God on behalf of sinners, not asking her to do something directly.
paulrc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually there is a requirement to go to > confession once a year. If you haven't been to > confession in the past 12 months, you aren't > supposed to take communion. But it's all done on > an honor system - no one but the parishioner keeps > track. Needless to say, the Church encourages more > frequent confession, but once a year is the > requirement. The confession can be anonymous > (through the screen) or sitting face to face - up > to the parishioner. In my experience, the priest > often won't look at you when listening to the > confession, but will when talking or giving advice > - which is beyond the sacrament as you're > officially only there to confess sins, make an act > of contrition (prayer) and receive absolution. > > As for the praying to Mary or other saints, I'm > not sure if praying is the correct verb. Catholics > obviously pray to God, and the way I've always > understood it is when talking/praying to a saint > it's only to ask for intercession to God. Even the > "Hail Mary," if you think about what the words > actually say, is asking Mary to pray to God on > behalf of sinners, not asking her to do something > directly.
I thought the requirement was to take communion at least once a year. Unless your are pretty much sinless, you would need to go to confession too, so I suppose you are right. However, it is on the honor system and no one will check up on you. I know Catholics who never or almoost never go to confession and still take communion.
I don't think there's any requirement to take communion. To be honest, I'm not sure (converted about eight years ago, so didn't get the background you would growing up with it). But confession once a year is what I was taught in RCIA (like adult Sunday school for people intending to convert).
You can take communion weekly with the once-a-year confession. You just aren't supposed to take communion if you've committed any mortal sins (the big ones). Oh, this might be what you're thinking of - it is a mortal sin to miss weekly Mass. You don't have to take communion but you have to go to Church, or at least make an honest effort to get there.
"twice a year" Catholics and the cafeteria Catholics. There's the official position and then there's what the average Catholic actually does in practice (often two different things.)
Vatican II caused a sea-change in the church. Things were never quite the same afterward. Maybe it's the equivalent of the Mormons making changes to the BoM and the temple ceremony (and then some.) It caused the average member to go, WTF? That, and the constant pronouncements against artificial birth control in the 60's, 70's and beyond caused many average Catholics to take the church with a huge grain of salt. Those items, combined with the sheer size and unmanagability of the church, make dissent among the ranks not only possible but probable.
It does make me wonder if that's a harbinger for Mormonism in the coming centuries.
I think that one major difference between Catholocism and Mormonism is that disaffected Catholics seldom (from what I've seen) lose faith in Jesus or God. They tend to retain their spiritual outlook even if they reject the church.
paulrc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think there's any requirement to take > communion. To be honest, I'm not sure (converted > about eight years ago, so didn't get the > background you would growing up with it). But > confession once a year is what I was taught in > RCIA (like adult Sunday school for people > intending to convert). > > You can take communion weekly with the once-a-year > confession. You just aren't supposed to take > communion if you've committed any mortal sins (the > big ones). Oh, this might be what you're thinking > of - it is a mortal sin to miss weekly Mass. You > don't have to take communion but you have to go to > Church, or at least make an honest effort to get > there. You can take communion up to twice a day but it is required to take it on Easter. I am not sure about confession other than I suppose if you hadn't had communion for a year, you would have to confess unless you were a pretty saintly p erson
The Catholics didn't either the first 1000 years. Give the Mormons some time. I think Mormons will tolerate and embrace their opposition over time. It's part of what religions have to do to adapt over time to survive.
One good example is the South American "Liberation Theology" movement. The church officially is opposed to this movement, and often rails against it. There are occasional casualties. But by and large the movement has survived.
There are nuns who advocate, sometimes vociferously, for the priesthood. And Trappist monk, and world-famous author Thomas Merton ("The Seven Story Mountain") had a well-known attraction for Buddhism as well as Catholocism.
The church also tolerates visionaries, even when the visions are not officially recognized. I believe that the visions at Medjugorje fit that definition.
From what I understand, the investigations into the apparitions and other phenomena in Bosnia came up with some problems.
My take is that the Church gets uncomfortable with miracles outside of sacraments. A priest told me once if you think about it, that makes sense. The clergy has kind of a monopoly on things - except for baptism, you need a priest for sacraments, and its through the sacraments (the Church teaches) that you strengthen your relationship with God. So anything that happens elsewhere kind of cuts into their monopoly - I do believe most priests are well intentioned, but they are still human.
Anyway, they seem to tenaciously try to prove the miracle wasn't a miracle - especially the big ones that cause a lot of buzz, like Marian apparitions. Medjugorje started back in the late 80s I believe, and despite all the pilgrims who say they saw things and filled out those statements, still no determination. And it's not like it would be the first apparition site to get approval - Lourdes, Fatima, Guadalupe, etc.
It is my guess that mormons cannot be organ doners either. Brigham taught that in the resurrection every molecule that had ever been part of the beings body would be returned to it. Therefore the transplantee would have to give up that heart, liver or stem cell. Does that translate to eternal death? Ask about that in GD class or HP group meeting.
They used to carve Saints up and sell them as holy relics. Carrying around the dead Pope's dessicated finger would allegedly bring you his blessings. If he was important enough, you would put his finger in a gilded box and build an entire Cathedral around it with his name. San Marco in Venice, for example, was built when they stole St. Mark's body from Egypt and brought him to Vencie.
axeldc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They used to carve Saints up and sell them as holy > relics. Carrying around the dead Pope's > dessicated finger would allegedly bring you his > blessings. If he was important enough, you would > put his finger in a gilded box and build an entire > Cathedral around it with his name. San Marco in > Venice, for example, was built when they stole St. > Mark's body from Egypt and brought him to Vencie.
Most relics are fake and educated Catholics are aware of that. Therefore, I doubt many real saints were carved up. It is more likely that unscrupulous people sold fakes to the uneducated back in the Middle Ages.
I would guess the reason there were so many fakes is because there were plenty of true believers (no doubt-not as educated as bona dea) who were credulous. Look at the shroud even now.
I like that example of gathering pieces of wood that were supposed to be pieces of Jesus' actual cross. There would be enough to make a forest. ;-)
Catholics who actually believe in general are no more or less credulous than Mormons. They might vary by degree. Just read this thread...the comments defending and correcting the "real" Catholic beliefs follow the same patterns as Mormons when they correct the inaccuracies. "It wasn't a flying dragon with BLUE spots, the spots were PINK!"
dagny Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...given the target consumers were/are gullible. > > I would guess the reason there were so many fakes > is because there were plenty of true believers (no > doubt-not as educated as bona dea) who were > credulous. Look at the shroud even now. > > I like that example of gathering pieces of wood > that were supposed to be pieces of Jesus' actual > cross. There would be enough to make a forest. > ;-) > > Catholics who actually believe in general are no > more or less credulous than Mormons. They might > vary by degree. Just read this thread...the > comments defending and correcting the "real" > Catholic beliefs follow the same patterns as > Mormons when they correct the inaccuracies. "It > wasn't a flying dragon with BLUE spots, the spots > were PINK!"
Some of us think it is important to get facts right when criticizing. If Catholics pray to God, and they do, it is wrong to make blanket statements saying they don't.Same thing with praying to icons. Greek and Russian Orthodox use icons. Catholics don't.They use statues and the do not pray to them. They pray to the person represented by the statue. Those are facts. Facts matter and disinformation is just that. You are a scientific person. You should get that.Sloppy research and misinformation do matter to me.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/07/2011 10:06PM by bona dea.