Christianity is Catholic

[Hyena Dandy]

Okay, this is something that could just as easily go under "Things I hate" as it could under religion.

But having seen one too many stupid comments from my friends on Facebook, I'm venting on here as well as on there.

Would people PLEASE stop assuming all Christians are Catholic?

In fact, in the US, most Christians are NOT Catholic. In fact, if you're dealing with the Jerry Falwell/Jack Chick types, they usually hate CATHOLICS as much as they do... Well, gays, atheists, muslims, everything else.

Also, as a side note, when it comes to papal infallibility.

The pope is NOT infallible with EVERYTHING he says. In general, the pope is infallible ONLY when he is... I forget the term. Basically, making a special "I am the pope" proclamation.

Papal bulls and Papal proclamations or church edicts are not the same thing. Most popes have not even invoked Infallibility.

Metaphorically speaking, its similar to how the President does not have everything he says immediately made into law unless he signs an Executive Order to the effect.




Edit to Summarize, because I ramble:

Most Christians are not Catholic, and hate the pope.

And the pope is not ALWAYS infallible. Only when he says he's being in fallible. Which I think has been done so few times that an idiot wouldn't need to take off his shoes to count.

[HYHYBT]

Most Christians are not Catholic, and hate the pope.The first is true (at least in this country; not sure about worldwide); the second is not. "Jerry Falwell/Jack Chick types" ≠ "most Christians"

[Hyena Dandy]

Thank you!

I apologize, in my upsettedness I mixed two independent thoughts together. I apologize.

Most Christians are Catholic, and most of the Jerry Falwell types hate the Pope. I apologize profusely.

[Mytical]

Its the same reason people seem to believe religion = Christianity. The most visible/vocal group wins? *shrugs*. Religion does not have to = Christianity. Christianity does not have to equal Catholic, Catholic does not have to equal zealot.

[draco664]

I apologize profusely.

Wow. An apology on a debating forum devoted to religious topics. There's something you don't see every day...

[Cheshire]

Wow. An apology on a debating forum devoted to religious topics. There's something you don't see every day...

Simply for a correction in their original post, not an apology for anything opinion wise being stated.

Facebook tends to show the ignorance in people. The subject you've said is surprisingly intelligent compared to the cesspool of ideas on Facebook.

[Andara Bledin]

It's not just Facebook. There have been many debates here where blanket statements are made about "religion" or "Christianity" that are about the smaller subsets. A goodly number of people seem to think that all religion is like the religion they had forced upon them when they were kids and have a hard time getting out of that mindset.

^-.-^

[Ipecac Drano]

What I've been seeing isn't people equating Xtianity with religion in general, but simply using Xtian examples of attributes that are universal in religion.

[Andara Bledin]

Except that in a lot of cases, they aren't.

Just because many religions remain obscure to many of us doesn't mean they're as obscure to the rest.

It's better to err on the side of caution and actually say what it is you mean as opposed to painting all religion with a brush that's really only supposed to be aimed at a portion thereof.

^-.-^

[Ipecac Drano]

Except that in a lot of cases, they aren't.
No, they aren't. But in a lot of other other cases, they are.

Just because many religions remain obscure to many of us doesn't mean they're as obscure to the rest.
Which is why the parts that are not obscure are being focused upon.

It's better to err on the side of caution and actually say what it is you mean as opposed to painting all religion with a brush that's really only supposed to be aimed at a portion thereof.And it doesn't hurt to acknowledge the finer brushstrokes instead of declaring them to be wider than what they are.
;)

[Hyena Dandy]

Its the same reason people seem to believe religion = Christianity. The most visible/vocal group wins? *shrugs*. Religion does not have to = Christianity. Christianity does not have to equal Catholic, Catholic does not have to equal zealot.

My point was the most visible/vocal group (at least in the US) is NOT Catholic.

[BigGiant]

Even worse (to me at least) are the folks that think that "their" form of Christianity is the only true form.

I've had people tell me that Catholics aren't Christian, or that Calvinists aren't Christian.

I hate to tell you, but if someone believes in our favorite magical Jew as their savior, regardless of their particular set of rules and customs, they're Christian.

Now if you want to say that in your opinion that they're not "good" Christians or that "they're doing it wrong", that's fine, but don't tell me they're not Christians.


/semi off topic rant

[Ipecac Drano]

Even worse (to me at least) are the folks that think that "their" form of Christianity is the only true form.Which is one of the reasons why I've given up on religion altogether.

I've had people tell me that Catholics aren't Christian, or that Calvinists aren't Christian.I've heard that all too many times when I was a Xtian, er, Catholic, er, I mean...
;)

I hate to tell you, but if someone believes in our favorite magical Jew as their savior, regardless of their particular set of rules and customs, they're Christian.Which reminds me of something else that amuses me. If it's something that's good and can't be explained and comes from something Xtian, it's a miracle or miraculous. If it's something that's good (or bad) and can't be explained and comes from something non-Xtian, it's magic.

[Andara Bledin]

No, they aren't. But in a lot of other other cases, they are.
At which point they are completely outside the scope of this thread.

And it doesn't hurt to acknowledge the finer brushstrokes instead of declaring them to be wider than what they are.
Are we even discussing the same post? The OP is specifically about not using finer brushstrokes when they would be appropriate.

^-.-^

[Ipecac Drano]

At which point they are completely outside the scope of this thread.They're still relevant to this thread.


Are we even discussing the same post? The OP is specifically about not using finer brushstrokes when they would be appropriate.I wasn't talking to the OP.

[Kheldarson]

For your edification, HD, the term you were looking for was "ex cathedra" which means, literally, "from the chair". These are simply statements reaffirming or re-declaring existing Church doctrine, and, hence, the only times when the pope is completely infallible.

[smileyeagle1021]

HD, a few things, first, playing devils advocate. There is a difference between official church doctrine and popular belief amongst members of a faith. I will take you at your word that the official doctrine is that the Pope is falliable, that does not change that to as least some Catholics he is not. So, saying that their is a belief within Catholacism that the Pope is infalliable while not really true isn't really false either.
Second, this is one thing I do have to respect about Catholacism, they recognize the Pope as a man, a wise man, but a man non the less. After so long of living in a society where the President of the church is considered to be more than a man, to be a prophet, whose very words are divine and revelation, it is refreshing to hear people recognize that their religious leaders, wise as they are, are still men.

And to Big Giant, one thing I'd like to throw out there. Belief in and following of Christ just means that you believe in and follow Christ. I'd argue that Christ and the church are in fact quite separable. Saying one is Christian implies membership to a church, which in no way guarantees that the person actually understands Christ's teachings. I like how my mother now puts it, "I am no longer a Christian, I am a disciple and follower of Christ".

[Andara Bledin]

I'm not sure why a declaration of Christianity should automatically imply affiliation with a church any more than saying one is religious automatically implies that they're Christian.

^-.-^

[Cheshire]

I'm not sure why a declaration of Christianity should automatically imply affiliation with a church any more than saying one is religious automatically implies that they're Christian.

^-.-^

It's human nature to automatically connect a declaration with a common affiliation that it's often connected to.

In this example, being Christian with going to a certain church, or being religious and being Christian. If someone from the Middle East said they were religious, most would assume they are Islamic.

It draws into stereotypes, in making it easy for people to group vague ideas together. It is the duty of the person concluding the stereotype to delve deeper and find more about the subject. Of course, people are lazy so they take it at face value.

[HYHYBT]

I'd argue that Christ and the church are in fact quite separable.True! Saying one is Christian implies membership to a church...Not true. You can, of course, use your own definitions if you spell them out first, but if you take what other people who are not using your custom definitions say as if they were, you're bound to have problems. A Christian is one who believes in and/or follows Christ; this usually involves group participation, but not always, nor does worshipping with a group of people require that they all agree on every point. I am, and have always been, a Christian, and was no less of one during the ten years or so I didn't attend church at all and the two years I spent trying to decide which to settle back into.

On the other hand, if someone doesn't like some of the connotations of the word, they're welcome not to claim it for themselves :)

[Mytical]

My point was the most visible/vocal group (at least in the US) is NOT Catholic.

Yes..and no. I would safely assume (and I try not to assume anything) that the Pope is the best known religious leader in the world..ie the most visible leader. Also, it is estimated there are 1.5 Billion members (some non practicing of course, or various different 'types' of Catholics) in the world. Also very visible (kind of hard to hide 1.5 billion people).

The Catholic faith is (or maybe was..not sure) THE most powerful and influential christian group. Individuals may not be the most 'vocal', but the collective voices make quite a difference in world politics.

You are correct, however, that in the US this is not the case. Cults..which things like the WBC are..are MUCH more vocal and visible. Its like a car crash..hard to look away from. The thing is, they are most often cults, and no more christian then a chicken can be called christian. Like a LOT of the 'enlightened' (Note: Sarcasm) they cherry pick certain things from the bible..and ignore the rest. Or I guess the 'leader' does, and the rest follow. Their version is the only 'real' version, and everybody else is beneath them. They must share their 'wisdom', by force or shouting loud enough if that is what it takes, to all the poor 'uneducated' masses.

IE The 'ivory tower syndrome' otherwise known as "I know better then anybody else how their life should be ran" syndrome. :D

[HYHYBT]

A lot depends on where you are: I've heard it said, jokingly but not without cause, of many parts of Georgia that they have BOTH kinds: Baptist and Pentecostal.

[fireheart17]

Its the same reason people seem to believe religion = Christianity. The most visible/vocal group wins? *shrugs*. Religion does not have to = Christianity. Christianity does not have to equal Catholic, Catholic does not have to equal zealot.

Here's the Aussie English translations.

Muslim=religious nut, believes that Muslim should be the only religion and that we should be a Muslim nation (at which point I tend to point out that there has been no laws passed that say that we must cover ourselves up, fast for a month, pray 5 times a day or make a mass exodus to Mecca)

Christian=Not always Catholic, but generally assumed to be nuts who just want to infringe on certain groups rights. Presume that homosexuality is a lifestyle and it can be changed.

Private school=breeding ground for brainwashing.

:D

[Ginger Tea]

I liken the many religions that look to god of the bible to how we take our coffee

black no sugar = Jewdaism
White and Sugar = Christianity
and then Catholics and Protestants are in a never ending battle saying that White no sugar or black and sugar are the way to go.

As there are also many more different flavours over in the States this analogy kinda peters out unless you add salt, lemon, artificial sweetners, whiteners into the mix.
Decaf is herasy

At the end of the day its still coffee, its how you drink it that matters (to you).
And the Pope has as much sway over non Catholics as Ronald McDonald has over KFC