"Formerly Catholic, now Christian..."
So began the flyer in the local hardware store, looking for members for a support group for similar people who didn't think they had been Christian enough.
This really energized my prayer life, as in repeated cries of "Lord, why are some of your followers such yutzes?" If I wanted to practice a religion that specialized in "voting people off the island", well, I'm a Wiccan initiate; been there, done that.
By any historical or doctrinal measure, Catholics are Christians. They may be heretics, though objectively and historically it's the Protestants who have been doing the choosing. They may even be Damnable Heretics, if your God saves on the basis of works and not faith. But then, isn't that your problem with Catholicism?
Comments
Posted by: melodee
Posted on: August 27, 2007 02:33 PM
I LOVE the word "yutzes". It is so appropos by any historical or doctrinal measure. Thanks for the laugh. It is a pleasure to not read filthly name calling. I get your point and I agree. Although, I am on the Protestant side. Sort of. I belong to a non denominational Charismatic Church.
Posted by: Mell
Posted on: August 27, 2007 09:04 PM
I once had somebody (a preacher's son, no less) tell me that Catholicism has nothing to do with the bible. My response was "they picked it out." He had never heard of such a thing as the Council of Nicea, and couldn't believe that a bunch of Catholics sat around giving the thumbs up or down to the different books to be included in the word that he holds so dear.
My wife (who notices a lot of these things, since that's her dissertation area) has noticed the draw of the fallen Catholic to the new churches with the video screens and rock bands. I hold to Gurdjieff's line that the Catholic Church is in possession of a mystery it no longer understands. (But, possession is 9/10ths of the law, right?)
Posted by: jeffrey smith
Posted on: August 27, 2007 09:47 PM
Catholics Anonymous, a twelve step program for recovering Catholics. Just what the world needs...
Posted by: Jeffrey Quick
Posted on: August 28, 2007 08:27 AM
The PK's answer, were he literate enough about his faith, might have been "The Catholics weren't Catholic then." That's the Lutheran take: that the church that was a monster in 1517 wasn't yet a monster in 325. But since we're dealing with a dozen generations post-Christ, what objective reason have we to believe that the church was more capable of choosing doctrine earlier than later? I suspect that the churches where "Catholics aren't Christian" is taught don't even use the Nicene Creed...which is the touchstone for orthodox Christianity. That's one advantage of a liturgical church: you encounter the basics every service.
As for the mystery, it's a bit like public school: an organization that's a large monopoly is going to use one-size-fits-all methods that don't ensure that everybody gets it.
Jeffrey: "Hi, I'm Vinnie, and I'm a Papist." "HI, VINNIE!"