Is Catholicism True?

33 Responses to Is Catholicism True?

1. bgeorge77 says:

   11 March 2013 at 9:35 am

   Cost? The death of God’s Son upon a cross. (Bonus: the blood of uncounted–and counting!–martyrs over the last 2000 years.)

   Also, webmaster fees.
2. Chuck3030 says:

   11 March 2013 at 10:11 am

   Niiice…
   Why didn’t I think of that?
3. VexillaRegis says:

   11 March 2013 at 11:08 am

   Very in depth and convincing. Ha ha!
4. thereseb says:

   11 March 2013 at 11:15 am

   Links to “Is the Pope a Catholic?” Oh wait….
5. Supertradmum says:

   11 March 2013 at 11:31 am

   Great and much more convincing than most of the pundits today….
6. Mariana says:

   11 March 2013 at 11:43 am

   That so appealed both emotionally and intellectually : ) !
7. Laura98 says:

   11 March 2013 at 11:50 am

   Simple. Direct. Right to the point. I love it! :D
8. off2 says:

   11 March 2013 at 12:02 pm

   Just ’cause I’m EO doesn’t mean I can’t admire it, tremendously.
9. The Masked Chicken says:

   11 March 2013 at 12:02 pm

   Now, “Yes,” can mean a lot of things. It can mean an affirmation of a statement of fact or a hope or a wish. It may mean the belief is in a contingent future. It may mean, generally, yes, but there is not enough room for the qualifications. It may mean, “in the balance, probably , yes,” but that does not exclude the possibility of a partial, “no.” It may mean, “yes, but,” or “yes, and.” The, yes, may depend on content or context to the extent that one cannot really even say that the, “yes,” is really a, “yes.” There may be unseen forces constraining the writer, who really wishes to say, “no,” but cannot. It may have been a mistake in the Boolean programing, returning a, “yes,” because the original input was supposed to be a -1, but the minus sign got omitted. More than that, “yes,” is really more of a belief that something is, “yes,” rather than a fact of it being, “yes.” Besides, how can I be sure that what you mean by, “yes,” is the same as what I mean? What you mean by truth might not be what I mean by truth. All-in-all, there are many reasons to say that what the writer has written is ill-defined and unclear. Therefore, it may be ignored.

   See. Being a post-Modernist is not so hard ;)

   The Chicken
10. Dr. Edward Peters says:

    11 March 2013 at 12:09 pm

    TMC…you’re thinking too much! best, edp.
11. LarryW2LJ says:

    11 March 2013 at 12:11 pm

    Succint and minces no words – love it!

    Also leaves no doubt as to what the Webmaster believes!
12. The Masked Chicken says:

    11 March 2013 at 12:22 pm

    “TMC…you’re thinking too much! best, edp.”

    Now, “thinking,” can mean a lot of things…

    The Chicken

    P. S. Just goes to show that Modernism and its poor cousin, post-Modernism are like trying to drive a tank in quicksand: the wheels spin and there is a lot of noise, but seldom is there forward progress.
13. Makemeaspark says:

    11 March 2013 at 12:40 pm

    Untold amounts of money, I am sure!
14. Andkaras says:

    11 March 2013 at 12:56 pm

    Sometimes a “yes” is just a “yes”.
15. Kevin says:

    11 March 2013 at 1:32 pm

    Okay so the word written is clearly “Yes”, but surely in the “spirit” of iscatholicismtrue.com, we should say “maybe” or “perhaps” or “only as true as my neighbour’s personally devised religion of Zen Islam”.
16. Miss Jensen says:

    11 March 2013 at 1:34 pm

    The Masked Chicken:
    Having suffered through a bit of PoMo in college, I found your response vastly amusing!
    Not only is it like quick-sand for a car, it is also like a meat tenderizer for your brain. (I thought then as I think now, that just because you _can_ think in a certain way does not mean that you should, or indeed that you can think that way without doing damage to yourself. But unfortunately, I think a lot of people would condemn as “anti-intellectual” the idea that there are good ways and bad ways to think. )

    Whoever built the site has a sense of humor as well as a refreshingly straightforward response. :)
17. Discipulus Humilis says:

    11 March 2013 at 1:35 pm

    The web site proclaims not “Yes” but “YES.” An emphatic declaration, a pious confession of faith, which cannot be read otherwise than with emphasis and conviction.
18. Legisperitus says:

    11 March 2013 at 1:38 pm

    Miss Jensen: And if you don’t want to construct buildings in quicksand, you’re anti-architecture!
19. disco says:

    11 March 2013 at 1:39 pm

    It would have been more pastoral if it said, “sorry, but yes”
20. Bryan D. Boyle says:

    11 March 2013 at 1:50 pm

    Simple, direct, too the point.

    Sometimes, the most effective is a declaration based on belief and understanding.

    “Nuanced” answers are nothing more than leaving enough wiggle room to back off if you’re not sure.

    Let your “YES” be YES. No waffling around that one.
21. monmir says:

    11 March 2013 at 2:50 pm

    The year of Faith in one word
22. acricketchirps says:

    11 March 2013 at 3:10 pm

    but seldom is there forward progress.

    No, it was modernism making Great Progress that drove into the quicksand.
23. Fr_Sotelo says:

    11 March 2013 at 3:57 pm

    LOL
24. Rouxfus says:

    11 March 2013 at 4:03 pm

    The difficulty of explaining “why I am a Catholic” is that there are ten thousand reasons all amounting to one reason: that Catholicism is true. [G.K. Chesterton]
25. netokor says:

    11 March 2013 at 5:24 pm

    The only way you can update this site is by translating that resounding YES into different languages.
26. everett says:

    11 March 2013 at 5:50 pm

    Have you seen this site’s cousin– http://www.isthereapope.com/ ? It’ll be interesting to see how quickly that one is updated.
27. StJude says:

    11 March 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Ha! Love!

    @everett… love that too!
28. mammamia says:

    11 March 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Ha ha! Love it!
    Took me 37 yrs to figure out that answer for myself.
    Glad to see someone applied the kISS principal to the question!
29. dspecht says:

    11 March 2013 at 7:13 pm

    Masked Chicken:

    LOL, :-D That´s it!!

    It is exactly what Ebf. Müller of the CDF would make out of this text – or di Noia or Cantalamessa: with some special HERMENEUTIC. You know, you need always some hermeneutic, you can interprete it… must interprete it…. – as Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Gadamer, Heidegger — and Derida etc…. tell us.

    It is sadly also the project of the so called “Hermeneutic of Continuity” – what is no other than this post-modernist / post-modern “hermeneutism”, leading to total relativism!

    Hope the next Pope will not be a post-modernist of this type anymore!

    GOD bless!
30. Ed the Roman says:

    11 March 2013 at 9:12 pm

    I dunno. Some fonts are really expensive.
31. Andrew Saucci says:

    11 March 2013 at 9:20 pm

    I just looked at the source code for that site– I think the owner overspent. I could have done it with Notepad in about half a dozen lines. I like it, though.
32. LarryW2LJ says:

    12 March 2013 at 11:51 am

    Fr. Z,

    Here’s another good one:

    http://www.isthereapope.com/
33. maryh says:

    12 March 2013 at 11:51 am

    It’s a page or redirect from phatmass.com. Take a look at what they say about themselves: http://www.phatmass.com/about-phatmass/

    Their tagline: Converting Catholics to Catholicism since 2000

    Awesome.