café crema wrote:The only hypocrisy I see is a person who claims to be Catholic but just hates it when people say something nice about Catholicism and so just has to call them names.
Well, what I usually see are antimormons overlooking the wrongs in catholic history as they sing praises for the catholic mass and for the catholic church, and at the same time pick at Mormon history and the LDS leaders. But then again I saw this on your catholic taliban site when it came to the LDS church and its history and the LDS leaders. A lot of hypocrisy too as they gave the catholic church a free pass but not the LDS church.
No one was talking about the history of the LDS church in this thread, just talking about positive experiences they had in Catholic or other churches. But you just can't stand it when people say nice things about churches other than the LDS church so you have to come in and crap in their thread.
Buffalo wrote: The Catholic Church's history is indeed worse than the Mormon Church's history. But, at least their services won't put you to sleep. That's something, right?
However, having said that, if someone finds some level of solace in a church, I say good for them. As an atheist, I believe all religions are wrong. However, that doesn't mean that people can't find personal fulfillment in attending one or more churches.
"Joseph Smith was called as a prophet, dumb-dumb-dumb-dumb-dumb" -South Park
As for the Catholic Church and its history, I'll paraphrase Billy Graham. He says if you ever find a perfect church don't join it because as soon as you do it won't be perfect anymore.
Our friends on the catholic taliban site should take note of your post. You gave a very balanced post. In the old days, I remember you differently. But maybe I have confused you with someone else. You seem to have a level head about it all now.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
quark wrote: The Mormons took worship to a new height. Catholics took a heightened worship down to the people. Pros and cons, I suppose.
When you see regular people; moms, grandmas, youth, etc. all helping with the most sacred part of the ritual, it gives it a real down to earth feel.
Protestants would take issue with your first sentence. The old mass was very distant from the people. This was one problem that Luther had. However, after vatican II, the mass was changed and it became more people oriented. But one can not compare it to a baptist service. The success of the bells of saint mary and going my way was because bing played a very people oriented priest. He was not high and mighty and the nuns in the bells were also people friendly. When I was a kid it was not necessarily this way.
In a LDS service for the three hours almost all are involved in some way or the other.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
As for the Catholic Church and its history, I'll paraphrase Billy Graham. He says if you ever find a perfect church don't join it because as soon as you do it won't be perfect anymore.
Our friends on the catholic taliban site should take note of your post. You gave a very balanced post. In the old days, I remember you differently. But maybe I have confused you with someone else. You seem to have a level head about it all now.
Why does it matter on this site what others may have said on another? Why do you bring up the history of either church when people on this thread were talking about their experiences and not about the history of either church?
Here is the reason to go to Mass: not because the mass is beautiful but because it is the correct way to worship god.
And to be a catholic is not a sunday experiment in the beautiful. It becomes a way of life and a commitment to become a saint.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
quark wrote: The Mormons took worship to a new height. Catholics took a heightened worship down to the people. Pros and cons, I suppose.
When you see regular people; moms, grandmas, youth, etc. all helping with the most sacred part of the ritual, it gives it a real down to earth feel.
Protestants would take issue with your first sentence. The old mass was very distant from the people. This was one problem that Luther had. However, after vatican II, the mass was changed and it became more people oriented. But one can not compare it to a baptist service. The success of the bells of saint mary and going my way was because bing played a very people oriented priest. He was not high and mighty and the nuns in the bells were also people friendly. When I was a kid it was not necessarily this way.
In a LDS service for the three hours almost all are involved in some way or the other.
Why does anyone here believe that Whyme is a Catholic in any way shape or form? Can anyone cite a post from him that positively describes any aspect of Catholicism? There is an abundance of posts on his part that extol the virtues and validity of Mormonism and nothing of the like for Catholicism. Why do you all continue to call him Catholic?
café crema wrote:Why does it matter on this site what others may have said on another? Why do you bring up the history of either church when people on this thread were talking about their experiences and not about the history of either church?
Because it is hard to tolerate the remarks of the critics of the LDS church singing praises for the catholic church and its mass. I had the same problems at the taliban site. The hypocrisy was very telling. As someone already said, no church has a perfect history and I mentioned this fact on the taliban site. Now I do like the comments of Bart. He was very fair and very catholic in his remarks.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
café crema wrote:Why does it matter on this site what others may have said on another? Why do you bring up the history of either church when people on this thread were talking about their experiences and not about the history of either church?
Because it is hard to tolerate the remarks of the critics of the LDS church singing praises for the catholic church and its mass. I had the same problems at the taliban site. The hypocrisy was very telling. As someone already said, no church has a perfect history and I mentioned this fact on the taliban site. Now I do like the comments of Bart. He was very fair and very catholic in his remarks.
Why is it hard to tolerate the singing of praises for the Mass? You claim to attend Mass why do you go to Mass yet are so upset by those that enjoy it? That is hypocrisy! What is wrong with people saying they enjoy it? What does their enjoyment have to do with CAF? Why do you hate (so much so that it makes you nauseous) that they like it? You say you attend Mass but hate that others enjoy the experience, and attack them, even bash them for their enjoyment this is hypocritical. The history of the Catholic church has no bearing on a person enjoying the Mass any more than the history of the LDS church has bearing on enjoying an LDS Sacrament Meeting. You are filled with hate when it comes to the Catholic church, you have nothing good to say about it and you attack anyone who finds something nice about it.