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.