Attention all Catholic haters

A man doesn't have to be an official in a Church to introduce you to Christianity...maybe that is a doctrine of the Catholic Church, but no where in the bible - to my knowledge - does it say that only the Church can teach you about Christ. Furthermore, the Church has nothing to do with your personal relationship with God.

If you want to know where the Bible talks about the importance of the Church (and what the Church is!), try the Epistle letters. Ephesians 5:25 says:

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless."

The Church is the bride of Christ but she has nothing to do with your relationship with God?
Yet he is not speaking of a massive hierarchy defined by man-made doctrine and translation. Isn't there also a verse that says 2 or more men gathered in my name is a church.

The Church, with a capital C, is man made. The Church, with a capital C, has molested the word of God to its advantage...for power and control. The Church, with a capital C, is not needed, in any way, to build a relationship with God.

Hierarchy, schmierarchy. The church is a large organization because it is comprised of millions of individuals. Back in Pauls day it was thousands. Yes, thousands, have you guys ever read Acts? If you had, you'd know it had Apostles, Bishops and Deacons. I suppose next you'll be telling me that the first century church is unbiblical.

Try reading.
 
That may be your personal belief but that certainly is not a universal or even common belief.

That's why Christ called them the wide and narrow gates. The lemmings try to enter through the wide gate, following what is "commonly" believed.
 
That may be your personal belief but that certainly is not a universal or even common belief.

That's why Christ called them the wide and narrow gates. The lemmings try to enter through the wide gate, following what is "commonly" believed.

No, Jesus was speaking about the few who find the only right way to understand and conform to the divine commands that leads to the eternal life promised for obedience.

You, your church, and the many who desecrate the teachings of Jesus and dick around with bread and wine and worship a false roman triune mangod are on the wrong road.

duh.
 
If you want to know where the Bible talks about the importance of the Church (and what the Church is!), try the Epistle letters. Ephesians 5:25 says:

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless."

The Church is the bride of Christ but she has nothing to do with your relationship with God?
Yet he is not speaking of a massive hierarchy defined by man-made doctrine and translation. Isn't there also a verse that says 2 or more men gathered in my name is a church.

The Church, with a capital C, is man made. The Church, with a capital C, has molested the word of God to its advantage...for power and control. The Church, with a capital C, is not needed, in any way, to build a relationship with God.

Hierarchy, schmierarchy. The church is a large organization because it is comprised of millions of individuals. Back in Pauls day it was thousands. Yes, thousands, have you guys ever read Acts? If you had, you'd know it had Apostles, Bishops and Deacons. I suppose next you'll be telling me that the first century church is unbiblical.

Try reading.
Again, the topic asked why people dislike the Catholic Church. Now you have spiraled into something much different AND you are starting with the veiled insults, implying no one reads the bible because they don't agree with your interpretation of the importance of the Church. I don't think that is really the way to win over those who disagree with you.

I don't like the Catholic church because it is Catholicism, not Christianity. I don't believe you can pray to Mary, a man made saint, or any other figure. I don't believe in the Crucifix and rosary beads, because Jesus rose again. I don't believe in forcing faith, inquisitions, and using God to perpetuate man made power for a *few* chosen individuals.

Yes, if a church is large, there is a need for deacons, Apostles, Bishops or whatever social status the church deems necessary to place upon these people. But this need is to assist the spiritual needs of such a massive congregation. Who says a congregation has to be massive?
 
Again, the topic asked why people dislike the Catholic Church. Now you have spiraled into something much different AND you are starting with the veiled insults, implying no one reads the bible because they don't agree with your interpretation of the importance of the Church. I don't think that is really the way to win over those who disagree with you.

I don't like the Catholic church because it is Catholicism, not Christianity. I don't believe you can pray to Mary, a man made saint, or any other figure. I don't believe in the Crucifix and rosary beads, because Jesus rose again. I don't believe in forcing faith, inquisitions, and using God to perpetuate man made power for a *few* chosen individuals.

Yes, if a church is large, there is a need for deacons, Apostles, Bishops or whatever social status the church deems necessary to place upon these people. But this need is to assist the spiritual needs of such a massive congregation. Who says a congregation has to be massive?

I am just following along where you take me. If you think my disputing your claims is no way to win you over to my side, let me tell you something, allowing you to continue in your misconceptions isn't too productive, either.

Like this one:

I don't like the Catholic church because it is Catholicism

In the strictest theological sense, "catholicity" means universality - something on which Christians can agree on. What part of the Nicene Creed, the Apostle's creed, or just the phrase "Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again" do you not agree with?

Nobody cares if you don't like rosaries, least of all the Catholics. I make rosaries because anything that will get people praying is okay with me, or do you have something against praying, too? Oh, they have to do it YOUR way?

I have news for you: your hatefest against other people who call themselves Christian ain't Christian.

And the congregation won't be massive if "whosoever will" ain't welcome.
 
Last edited:
I didn't say any such thing, I said that people (not just women) who are not happy with their station in life won't be happy no matter what.
Didn’t mean to put words in your mouth or anything. My point was if a woman has a spiritual experience and is compelled to lead people, the structure of the Catholic Church will not work in her favor. Only men may lead.

You ought to try busting your ass as a parish priest who takes care of three churches because there aren't enough priests to go around in the God forsaken place you have been called to, or a Deacon who takes care of another three. You have to do that before you can get to be a Pope or a Bishop or a Cardinal.

I get that. I never said they didn’t “bust their ass” to become a Cardinal, or that it doesn’t take hard work and dedication to get there. It does. Point I was making was that there are “perks” and “rewards” – sometimes – for busting your ass, if you’re a man of course. If you bust your ass and become a cardinal, then you’ll get some neat historical access to the Vatican, get to consult the Pope, likely get to go out to nice restaurants, etc. This is indeed a reward, my friend, a reward that is not available to women. If you think the Bishops/Cardinals/Popes – who are humans – don’t enjoy these things then you are fooling yourself and are denying human nature itself.


But I think we're done here. Like most earthly minded people, you don't even know that the church is not an organization, it is the people in it, God's field. Stay away if you want and wallow in your ignorance.

Why are we done? I don’t disagree that the majority of people in the Catholic matrix are trying their best to work God’s will, but it is MOST DEFINITELY an organization. There is a Pope (leader), Cardinals underneath, Bishops underneath the Cardinals, and then droves of Priests underneath the Bishops. That is by definition an organization. If a Bishop tells a priest to do something, generally the priest will listen. How can you say that’s not a hierarchy? Or an organization? I’m not saying implying those are negative words, either. They’re just the truth.
 
Last edited:
Again, the topic asked why people dislike the Catholic Church. Now you have spiraled into something much different AND you are starting with the veiled insults, implying no one reads the bible because they don't agree with your interpretation of the importance of the Church. I don't think that is really the way to win over those who disagree with you.

I don't like the Catholic church because it is Catholicism, not Christianity. I don't believe you can pray to Mary, a man made saint, or any other figure. I don't believe in the Crucifix and rosary beads, because Jesus rose again. I don't believe in forcing faith, inquisitions, and using God to perpetuate man made power for a *few* chosen individuals.

Yes, if a church is large, there is a need for deacons, Apostles, Bishops or whatever social status the church deems necessary to place upon these people. But this need is to assist the spiritual needs of such a massive congregation. Who says a congregation has to be massive?

I am just following along where you take me. If you think my disputing your claims is no way to win you over to my side, let me tell you something, allowing you to continue in your misconceptions isn't too productive, either.

Like this one:

I don't like the Catholic church because it is Catholicism

In the strictest theological sense, "catholicity" means universality - something on which Christians can agree on. What part of the Nicene Creed, the Apostle's creed, or just the phrase "Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again" do you not agree with?
Yes, but was I not referring to Catholicism?

Nobody cares if you don't like rosaries, least of all the Catholics. I make rosaries because anything that will get people praying is okay with me, or do you have something against praying, too? Oh, they have to do it YOUR way?
Who said there was anything the matter with praying? Now your just making stuff up to somehow 'enhance' your argument. :sigh:

I have news for you: your hatefest against other people who call themselves Christian ain't Christian.

And the congregation won't be massive if "whosoever will" ain't welcome.

LMAO...okay. Where have I shown any hate or anything but respect and normal conversation. I disagree with you and YOU are the one who is going off the deep end. I disagree with you...doesn't mean I hate you, Catholics, or anyone else. Seems with your attitude - someone has to agree with you, your interpretation of the bible, and your doctrine - or they are haters. That is a fundamentally flawed premise and one of the reasons many people dislike the Catholic church...one of the many reasons people are drawn away from Christianity and living a faithful lifestyle. One of the reasons so many have split from the Catholic church. What's next, are you going to threaten me with an iron maiden until I profess Catholicism to be the only true path to heaven.

You are ridiculous!

The Catholic church has been and is burdened with corruption...no matter how you spin it. And its arrogance, making people think they are the sole mouthpiece for Christianity is regrettable.
 
I am just following along where you take me. If you think my disputing your claims is no way to win you over to my side, let me tell you something, allowing you to continue in your misconceptions isn't too productive, either.

Like this one:


In the strictest theological sense, "catholicity" means universality - something on which Christians can agree on. What part of the Nicene Creed, the Apostle's creed, or just the phrase "Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again" do you not agree with?

Nobody cares if you don't like rosaries, least of all the Catholics. I make rosaries because anything that will get people praying is okay with me, or do you have something against praying, too? Oh, they have to do it YOUR way?

I have news for you: your hatefest against other people who call themselves Christian ain't Christian.

And the congregation won't be massive if "whosoever will" ain't welcome.

I'm agnostic, and don't much care about doctrine.

That said, I come from a VERY religious background. To my mother and most of her side of the family, Catholics are idolators. They pray to saints and to statues. Catholics place an intermediary between God and man with priests that have no place in Biblical Christianity. There is a great deal that Protestants find offensive in Catholicism, and the strict German Baptists I grew up with didn't see Catholics as Christian at all.

Back in Germany, the Catholics had a pretty nasty habit of burning Protestants at the stake, so I think that has formed much of the animosity.
 
Didn’t mean to put words in your mouth or anything. My point was if a woman has a spiritual experience and is compelled to lead people, the structure of the Catholic Church will not work in her favor. Only men may lead.

Look, you've got to believe me when I tell you that if God called a woman to lead a Mass, she would lead a Mass. Nobody and nothing can resist God. I know people who were shooting for ordination and never made it because God wasn't in it. I also know people who had everything against them who were ordained against all the odds.

This ain't your choice and it ain't my choice. It's God's choice. I know there are women who "lead". Look at how well it worked out for the Episcopal church, which is now only a church in the academic sense. It's certainly not of God, or they wouldn't be preaching heresies, like this.

The reason Paul didn't want women leading men in the early church is because the women were teaching gnosticism, not Christianity. He was trying to rid the church of heresies.
 
That may be your personal belief but that certainly is not a universal or even common belief.

That's why Christ called them the wide and narrow gates. The lemmings try to enter through the wide gate, following what is "commonly" believed.

Irrelevant. It does not change the fact that your assertion is little more than a persona belief that is not shared by everyone.


I can just as easily state that your belief in the church is the one leading the lemmings through the 'wide gates.'


Putting an institution lead by man as the unit that defines ones faith certainly does not seem like an intelligent way to go to me. I might be wrong. You might be wrong. But then again, that was never the topic of the thread.
 
Look, you've got to believe me when I tell you that if God called a woman to lead a Mass, she would lead a Mass. Nobody and nothing can resist God. I know people who were shooting for ordination and never made it because God wasn't in it. I also know people who had everything against them who were ordained against all the odds.

So we both agree that the Catholic Church structure was designed at a time when men led just about everything, I'm assuming. My belief is that when the women's movement took hold (over the past 80 years or so), and women were allowed the right to vote, equal opportunity in the workplace, etc, the Catholic Church - due to some very rigid rules - was unable to react.

I don't think it's God that's holding women back from leading Mass in the Catholic church; rather I think it's the man-made religious structure.

Why? Because in other denominations that don't have such strict hierarchical rules, we see women leading all the time. There are female pastors everywhere - just not in the Catholic church.



This ain't your choice and it ain't my choice. It's God's choice. I know there are women who "lead". Look at how well it worked out for the Episcopal church, which is now only a church in the academic sense. It's certainly not of God, or they wouldn't be preaching heresies, like this.

But that's the thing - it is your choice. I know you didn't design the structure of the Catholic Church, but your certainly advocating that it be upheld. And that's fine - it's your prerogative - however it's just not all that appealing for many modern women.


The reason Paul didn't want women leading men in the early church is because the women were teaching gnosticism, not Christianity. He was trying to rid the church of heresies.

But lets talk about today; do you believe women are incapable of effectively teaching the word of God in a Christian setting?
 
Look, you've got to believe me when I tell you that if God called a woman to lead a Mass, she would lead a Mass. Nobody and nothing can resist God. I know people who were shooting for ordination and never made it because God wasn't in it. I also know people who had everything against them who were ordained against all the odds.

So we both agree that the Catholic Church structure was designed at a time when men led just about everything, I'm assuming. My belief is that when the women's movement took hold (over the past 80 years or so), and women were allowed the right to vote, equal opportunity in the workplace, etc, the Catholic Church - due to some very rigid rules - was unable to react.

I don't think it's God that's holding women back from leading Mass in the Catholic church; rather I think it's the man-made religious structure.

Why? Because in other denominations that don't have such strict hierarchical rules, we see women leading all the time. There are female pastors everywhere - just not in the Catholic church.



This ain't your choice and it ain't my choice. It's God's choice. I know there are women who "lead". Look at how well it worked out for the Episcopal church, which is now only a church in the academic sense. It's certainly not of God, or they wouldn't be preaching heresies, like this.

But that's the thing - it is your choice. I know you didn't design the structure of the Catholic Church, but your certainly advocating that it be upheld. And that's fine - it's your prerogative - however it's just not all that appealing for many modern women.


The reason Paul didn't want women leading men in the early church is because the women were teaching gnosticism, not Christianity. He was trying to rid the church of heresies.

But lets talk about today; do you believe women are incapable of effectively teaching the word of God in a Christian setting?

What do you think the church is? The Augusta golf club?

I already told you why women can't teach, it's because given the choice they end up teaching heresy. Ever hear of Joyce Meyer? She's a phony baloney prosperity Gospel hack. Katherine Schori has singlehandedly led The Episcopal Church USA over a cliff. Doesn't that mean anything to you, or is the only thing that matters to you is the fact that a woman is in charge, never mind that she has destroyed an institution as old as the country itself.

Just how many women pastors do you know, I'll bet I have know more than you have.
 
I already told you why women can't teach, it's because given the choice they end up teaching heresy. Ever hear of Joyce Meyer? She's a phony baloney prosperity Gospel hack. Katherine Schori has singlehandedly led The Episcopal Church USA over a cliff. Doesn't that mean anything to you, or is the only thing that matters to you is the fact that a woman is in charge, never mind that she has destroyed an institution as old as the country itself.

Ok, I think we’re obviously not going to see eye to eye on this issue. You’re saying that women can’t preach because when “given the choice they end up teaching heresey”?

I mean – Clement – in my opinion that’s some 5th century thinking right there and obviously not the kind of stuff that would be very “welcoming” and “inviting” to a modern female parishioner. Again, you’re free to your own opinion and I would never ever want to force the Catholic Church or any private institution to change their ways, however telling women they're incapable of leading because if they do they'll "preach heresy and drive the church into the ground" is pretty offensive, and I'm not even a women.

Come on man.

.
 
Last edited:
You are grasping at straws. What is happening in the Episcopal Church is not the doing of one woman and your listing of a few women in defense of your absurd generalization ("women can't teach ... because given the choice they end up teaching heresy") is easily countered by noting the legion of corrupt and debauched men at every level who have led the Catholic Church. The Church can and has changed its beliefs over the years when faced with new facts and realities (the sun really does not revolve around the earth).
It could and still may change its view of a woman's place in it.

Generally speaking, the more bureaucratic and centralized the system, the longer it takes to react to change. This is for better or for worse.

Given that the Catholic Church is one of the more structured, centralized, and hierarchical churches out there, it's not surprising that it's still catering to societal norms from long ago while we see other less centralized denominations are more quickly to adapting to modern thinking (ie by letting women share equal power, etc).

Again, there are merits to having structure - no doubt - but there are also many drawbacks.
 
Last edited:
I mean – Clement – in my opinion that’s some 5th century thinking right there and obviously not the kind of stuff that would be very “welcoming” and “inviting” to a modern female parishioner. Again, you’re free to your own opinion and I would never ever want to force the Catholic Church or any private institution to change their ways, however telling women they're incapable of leading because if they do they'll "preach heresy and drive the church into the ground" is pretty offensive, and I'm not even a women.

Come on man.

.

How many women have you heard preach, Kev Bob? I mean really. Or are you just one of those people who need to be offended over something that has never affected you? I know you are not going to answer me because I am betting you have never heard one preach.

I, on the other hand, am still offended over the woman who destroyed the Episcopal church, because I used to be part of it. And there are a lot of women who agree with me. And a lot of men.

I know that goes against your politically correct sensibilities, but that's reality. I have to live and work in the church, you don't.

What is happening in the Episcopal Church is not the doing of one woman

You need to educate yourself on this topic.

You are ridiculous!

No, YOU are ridiculous.

This is my calling, son, my vocation, to teach what I know. Who are you to say otherwise? No, you don't have to agree with me, but I would at least like for you to know what you are talking about, and you don't. You apparently think the church is a building or a denomination, and it isn't. The church is the people, not an organization you think it's okay to hate because someone told you that. When you start badmouthing the church you are badmouthing a billion laymen who subscribe to the beliefs that I am espousing.

I don't even care if you disagree with me, but you don't even have a reason, outside of petty prejudices that are as false as prejudices get, over things you don't understand.
 
How many women have you heard preach, Kev Bob? I mean really. Or are you just one of those people who need to be offended over something that has never affected you? I know you are not going to answer me because I am betting you have never heard one preach.

I grew up Catholic. I went to mass (almost) every Sunday for about 18 years straight. Yes, I’ve heard people preach. I’ve also have heard women preach – namely when I was courting my wife and attending some of her D.O.C. gatherings. You’re wrong here.

I, on the other hand, am still offended over the woman who destroyed the Episcopal church, because I used to be part of it. And there are a lot of women who agree with me. And a lot of men.
But Clement, I’m not doubting that particular woman destroyed the church. I know nothing of that topic so I’ll take your word. What is absurd is saying that “because she destroyed it, and is a lady, ALL women are now incapable of leading churches”.


I know that goes against your politically correct sensibilities, but that's reality. I have to live and work in the church, you don't.

Politically correct? I thought I was just following general modern thinking by saying women and men are equal when it comes to things like intelligence, etc. There are successful women politicians, CEOs, entrepreneurs, etc, etc; women have proven that they can in fact lead. It’s an indisputable fact.

To say that men are generally better at leading is one thing, and though I might disagree we could at least have a conversation there.

But to say that NOT ONE woman on the face of the planet - not a single one of the 4,500,000,000 on earth today - is fit for the job is just sort of crazy to me.

With that line of thinking – in today’s modern world – of course you’re going to get “haters”.





Note: I don't think I said those other quotes.
 
Last edited:
Let's boil it down to the core. Apparently, we are led to understand that the lack of a penis makes one unqualified to be a minister of the gospel.
 
What's your beef?

Please be specific. No "pedophile priest" answers, there are no more pedophile priests than there are pedophile scoutmasters. Or schoolteachers.

Give me your theological reasons. REAL theological reasons, not made up theology.

Another disingenuous troll. In case you forgot, scoutmasters and schoolteachers are likely to be married with children, the category of people least likely to be pedophiles. Otherwise, there are no "theological reasons to "hate" Catholics, except in your own imagination. Abstinence was a political device for ending nepotism in the priesthood. It no longer serves this purpose and should be abolished. I predict this will end within 20 years.
 
What's your beef?

Please be specific. No "pedophile priest" answers, there are no more pedophile priests than there are pedophile scoutmasters. Or schoolteachers.

Give me your theological reasons. REAL theological reasons, not made up theology.

Another disingenuous troll. In case you forgot, scoutmasters and schoolteachers are likely to be married with children, the category of people least likely to be pedophiles. Otherwise, there are no "theological reasons to "hate" Catholics, except in your own imagination. Abstinence was a political device for ending nepotism in the priesthood. It no longer serves this purpose and should be abolished. I predict this will end within 20 years.

My ignore list is getting longer and longer.

FYI, Mr. Troll, this thread was an invitation to someone who didn't want his own thread derailed.
 

Forum List

Back
Top