spotlight
I have been caught up, recently, reading not one but two very long comment-discussions about Catholicism as Christianity. There is an astonishing amount of misinformation about Catholicism out there, and we are certainly not helped by the disgraceful ineptitude and weakness of our administrators in handling all of the sexual abuse scandals. But still, I am appalled at the casual nature of the insults that are flung our way -- and how the insult-slinger will simply shrug off any accusations of ignorance, in essence saying, "It doesn't matter what you think, you're Catholic, and therefore, damned."
The first I found via Ambra, over at La Shawn Barber's Corner. La Shawn had posted this comment on the Pope's death:
This comment sparked quite a few hard feelings among La Shawn's Catholic readers. I can understand why. She's essentially calling the Pope a hypocrite with that "If the Pope believed..." construction. And then she's also requiring a salvation-by-faith-alone belief, as well, completing ignoring the Grace we receive via the Sacraments. The clearest thing that comes through in this comment is that La Shawn doesn't have the faintest idea of the basis of Catholic teachings. The other thing that comes through here is the whiff of bigotry, which is ignorance that refuses to be educated. I read through the lengthy comment trail, frustrated at my own poor apologetic skills, and let it go.
Then, today, I came across a similar thread on RedState, in which redstatesoccermom asks, Catholics v Baptist, help me out. She talked about having seen this lovely little ditty on a Baptist church's sign:No Truth, No Hope, Following a Hell-Bound Pope. Great, huh?
So I descended once again into the comments, which were fun in the same way that you just love it when you stop banging your head against that brick wall. No, seriously -- it's a snake pit, that discussion. There are so many people who do not understand even the smallest things, like our veneration of Mary, or the Communion of Saints. They brands us as idolators, and say we do not worship Christ. What do they think is the point of the Mass, and the Eucharist?
They don't have a clue.
It's only going to get worse, and it makes me squirm. I need to brush up on my apologetics, especially Scott Hahn's excellent defense against sola scriptura. Patrick Madrid had this great series, Pope Fiction that was just perfect for the kind of discussions we're going to be seeing a lot of, these days.
I need to prepare. I need to learn the material, and I also need to find a way to convey the information in some non-inflammatory way. I always end up pissing people off, when that is very rarely (I won't say never) my intention. It doesn't do any good to insult someone you're trying to educate. Of course, the very attempt at education is an insult to someone who is already sure they know everything, so right from the get-go you've got a bad situation in a lot of these internet debates. Yet, the attempt must be made. So far I've been content to let others fight these battles, but if one lands on my own doorstep, I won't back away from it.
The first I found via Ambra, over at La Shawn Barber's Corner. La Shawn had posted this comment on the Pope's death:
While I am not up to theological discussions about the matter just yet, I will say, preliminarily, that if the Pope believed Christ died for his sins, and that we are saved through faith alone in Christ alone by his grace alone, the Pope, like anyone else who believes these things, will be spared from God’s righteous and just punishment.
This comment sparked quite a few hard feelings among La Shawn's Catholic readers. I can understand why. She's essentially calling the Pope a hypocrite with that "If the Pope believed..." construction. And then she's also requiring a salvation-by-faith-alone belief, as well, completing ignoring the Grace we receive via the Sacraments. The clearest thing that comes through in this comment is that La Shawn doesn't have the faintest idea of the basis of Catholic teachings. The other thing that comes through here is the whiff of bigotry, which is ignorance that refuses to be educated. I read through the lengthy comment trail, frustrated at my own poor apologetic skills, and let it go.
Then, today, I came across a similar thread on RedState, in which redstatesoccermom asks, Catholics v Baptist, help me out. She talked about having seen this lovely little ditty on a Baptist church's sign:No Truth, No Hope, Following a Hell-Bound Pope. Great, huh?
So I descended once again into the comments, which were fun in the same way that you just love it when you stop banging your head against that brick wall. No, seriously -- it's a snake pit, that discussion. There are so many people who do not understand even the smallest things, like our veneration of Mary, or the Communion of Saints. They brands us as idolators, and say we do not worship Christ. What do they think is the point of the Mass, and the Eucharist?
They don't have a clue.
It's only going to get worse, and it makes me squirm. I need to brush up on my apologetics, especially Scott Hahn's excellent defense against sola scriptura. Patrick Madrid had this great series, Pope Fiction that was just perfect for the kind of discussions we're going to be seeing a lot of, these days.
I need to prepare. I need to learn the material, and I also need to find a way to convey the information in some non-inflammatory way. I always end up pissing people off, when that is very rarely (I won't say never) my intention. It doesn't do any good to insult someone you're trying to educate. Of course, the very attempt at education is an insult to someone who is already sure they know everything, so right from the get-go you've got a bad situation in a lot of these internet debates. Yet, the attempt must be made. So far I've been content to let others fight these battles, but if one lands on my own doorstep, I won't back away from it.
posted by Joan at 10:36 PM
2 Comments:
I think you have to understand the basic nature of the debate and not the specifics.
Roman Catholics, as a matter of name if nothing else, are automatically at odds with the rest of the "Christian" universe. We are used to considering ourselves as "universal and apostolic" when in truth, we Roman Catholics don't truly understand what that means and it's implications with reference to the rest of the "Christian" faiths.
When discussing the Roman Catholic church, nobody stops to consider that in our faith, we worship the Son of God as God just as a Baptist, a Lutheran or a Methodist might. The forms of worship are very similar - a Baptist, as an example, relies on the leadership and intrepretation of Scripture just as we do only our leadership is a bit more formal.
The discussion points are always based on the Papal presence or the different forms of resolving "sin". Roman Catholics don't understand that the Pope is a human being first and a Pontiff second. It's hard to even explain that the Pope is actually a ponfifex - first among equals if you will. He is only infalliable in matter of the teachings of the church. Technically, he is considered a Prime Minister in terms of State issues - the Vatican State is actually run by the Latin Curia - the Pope is a figure head.
Another contention between "Christian" faiths are acts of contrition. Consider this - which is a better method of contrition - a confession to a Priest with absolution and prayer after or a public altar call in which one publicly asks for forgiveness never speficying the nature of the sin? Is one better than the other?
I would posit no - that it's the true contrition in the heart that matters - not the method by which one atones for one's behavior. The form contrition is not relevant.
Lastly, Roman Catholics have to understand that the church is called Roman Catholic because of the ancient history or Rome and it's close association with Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church is basically a carbon copy, in terms of governance, to the Roman Senate and Publica - the basis of our own form of secular governance.
To put paid to my contribution to your post, arguing about the mechanics of religion rather than the truth of faith is silly. In truth when one dismisses one's religion as somehow unworthy of consideration just becasue it is called Baptist, Pentecostal, Evangelical or Roman Catholic and has differing forms of worship is the worst form of bigotry.
And now I need a nap - I have a headache.
(grin)
All you've managed to do here is muddy the waters, T. You're implying that most Catholics worship the Pope, which (I hope) is completely wrong. You're also arguing that most Catholics don't understand that we worship Christ... or are you just playing again, and I missed that?
The arguments that I linked to are not arguing mechanics as you say, they are arguing "truths" -- sola fide and sola scriptura vs the Catholic Sacred Traditions, Sacraments, and Bible.
Of course the Protestants right up front fail to recognize that the Bible they rely on -- sola scripture -- was codified in the 4th century by the Catholic Church, and that one Catholic Bible was universal up until the 1500s and the Protestant Reformation.
It's not all about the Pope -- but the slams against the Pope, accusing him of being "Hell-bound" and a hypocrite, do sting. At least, they bother me. It is possible to disagree without being disagreeable... but perhaps not on this topic.
Post a Comment
<< Home