Show Color on Internet. ¿Are you a real Catholic?

Note: This interchange of message occurred on a now defunct forum for Catholics.  We offer it here because it’s typical for debates of this kind. It’s not enough to cite Scripture and you are right. You will encounter this type of arguments frequently.


Anonymous asked this question on 8/25/2000:

This is more of a statement to all experts out there and addressing your so called right to have a locked up forum on this Catholicism page. This is addressed specifically to the Roman Catholics out there that continue to batter down the informative answers given by other experts that might not be a Roman Catholic.

It is my understanding that the word Catholic means universal and not a specific denomination such as Roman Catholic. You might want to assume that your denomination has exclusive rights to answers on this page, but that is just not the case. This forum was set up so all people could ask questions of the universal church "experts". I know when I ask a question, I want to know what the original church views were that were setup by Christ and get references from the Holy Scriptures to back up a position. I will take all responses that I receive and do what God said to do and that is to test it against His Word.

This next part has to do directly with what I have been reading from other so called experts about this man Logmeon. Of all the responses to the questions that Logmeon has answered I see him give Scriptural references for everything. Then most of the times he will give follow up references to either books that were written or to papers that he has written on the subject. Have anyone here that is making these mean and slanderous comments, ever taken the time to objectively review his Scriptural references and the papers that he has written to find out if there is any substance to it? All I see him doing is just what Jesus told him to do and that is to preach the Word and rebuke everything else. What I have not seen from MOST, not all, of the "experts" to his responses, is taking what he has to say and trying to defeat it on the Scriptural references. You revert to name calling and slanderous accusations. Did Jesus or any of the Apostles revert to this? I do not think so. As best I can remember: Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God; you teach the traditions of men and not the commandments of God; you are mistaken not knowing the Scriptures or the power of God; may the LORD rebuke you.

These are the things that I remember off the top of my head on how Jesus and the original church handled things. I think that is the way we should handle all responses that we do not agree with. Give Scripture to back up your position and let each person search for the truth through the Holy Spirit.

I have one more comment or suggestion for the Roman Catholics out there. If you want your own page to speak to each other and ask questions on them, form your own page called the "Roman Catholic Denomination Page". I am sure that all experts that are not of the Roman Catholic denomination will stay out of there for you. But, to think that this page is just for the Roman Catholics is just being narrow minded in my opinion. What do you want to do with the Roman Catholics that call themselves "Old Catholics" that do not agree with or recognize anything past about 1870 including the Vatican Council and infallibility of the pope? Have you decided that they can not disagree with you either on this forum? Are they not really Catholic?

My questions and comments today were meant in good the Spirit of God. I did not post this to receive many responses to this, but to let us all think about how we are handling ourselves and see if it is holding up to the standards of what God expects and of the example Jesus has set for us. But, if anyone does have a constructive comment or question I will welcome it.

Lastly I would like to say that I was born a Roman Catholic, went to Catholic schools, was an alter boy, and went through all the steps of the faith. I am not speaking here from an uneducated point of view. I hope everyone takes the time to think about this and pray.

God Bless



mscperu gave this response on 8/28/2000:

Well, well, well.

This is the THIRD time I post the answer.

Will there be a fourth?



I’m a Roman Catholic so I feel challenged by your post. And I must confess that I’m happy about the entire fracas because a good debate clears up the atmosphere. You have a better view of the panorama.

First I would like to establish that our preoccupation is first and foremost the Catholics that can be misled by similar brands. They discover that they thought they were talking to a Roman Catholic and were duped. Their assumption is fair because generally when you talk about Catholics 99.99999% think about Roman Catholics. I invite you to make a survey in your office or workplace: Describe a Catholic.

So it’s not about semantics but about expectations. Suppose you search for, want, expect and consult about health food. Somebody offers healthy food. Well, wonderful! You found it! You open the package and you get junk food! Both are food! Worse if the junk food carries the label health food. The label should be more specific don’t you think so? You can state: this is food and it does no damage! I say that the innocent has been duped (conned, tricked, swindled, cheated, hoodwinked, and taken in). He got the wrong package. He has lost time and money (I’m a dun myself) and has to renew his quest, an effort avoided if the label was correct. So let’s not talk about denominations. Let’s talk about general acceptance of a word, shouldn’t we?

The argument you give that Scripture takes it all does not justify an expert. You should read the post "Tradition and Scripture". Catholicism (together with Old Catholics, and Orthodox and so on) has two legs to walk on. Evangelism has to use a stick to jump from Reformation to the First Church and stands on one very respectable leg. Protestantism has made from this precarious stance a veritable art. The Catholics have learned many things from them how to stand on one leg but will have to go on using two legs! Are you implying that the Catholic experts have to limit themselves only to arguments taken from Scripture? I hope not. That would be narrow. It would make this board a protestant board, wouldn’t it?

Now let’s say that someone brings up historical arguments. He is arguing from Tradition? I can find you the doctrine of a historical group from the first centuries that celebrated in the nude. Tradition shows that THE Catholic Church has been unified in its teaching. Now if you say that the accumulation of many historical facts makes you a Catholic is debatable. I say it’s the interpretation of these facts. Food in not equal food. The processing changes it!

Your impression is that the RC experts "batter down" (assault, beat, hit, thrash, pummel, pound, hammer) informative answers given by not RC. There are amongst us vehement experts and theirs is like the ire of God in the OT. It’s love under the disguise of ardent zeal. When somebody slights your mother would you argue without feelings?

The reason behind the "battering down" might be certain vehemence or outright hate. But what about self-defense, or better, what about the defense of the weak and the innocent? Let me explain.

Since I climbed the ladder to first place in ranking I get a regular number of ROMAN CATHOLIC private questions of very delicate nature that I generally treat in the confessionary where the faithful have the protection of the sigillum. I have noticed many times that they read my biography only later on during the ensuing interchange. What is worrying me is that I did not get these questions before being in the first place of ranking.

I will offer you a piquant comparison. It could be about me. Let us imagine someone has a delicate sexual problem to discuss (I got fake ones too). This someone goes the corresponding category, the Sexual Health Category. People are not very dedicated in making efforts. And they want the best. So they go to the ranking. They don’t read that it reflects activity. They think it’s quality (Rank, first place, many credits!). And suppose that the ranking’s first place of the Sexual Health Category is occupied be a travesty. Is he an expert? Oh yes, he is! But not in what one should generally expect! Need I elaborate further?

The metaphor shows that it’s not only about information. It’s about living, values and morale.

Would I suggest that this expert be removed from the Sexual Health Category? No (I hope my fellow Catholics of the board forgive me having a different opinion). This person has made his choice and open dialogue will help us both to define more our mutual stance. There is one condition. He has his idea about Sexual Health, but the ordinary questioner is entitled to know that it’s a travesty he is talking to don’t you think so? It’s about expectations.

I suggested very early since my first steps in this medium that in these interchanges the non-Catholics and ex-Catholics state so in their answer. But to no avail. So if the travesty proclaims that he is defending the original and true sexuality then the other experts have to enter into the fray in order to safeguard the innocent! Don’t they? More so if one assumes the disguise of a monogamous, chaste heterosexual!

If I am preoccupied about persons that have delicate problems I would feel compelled to monitor the responses of this person. I would provide those who have asked a question with a different alternative. Is that harassing? I don’t think so. It’s offering the option that wasn’t there before. I offer freedom of choice. That’s what dialogue is for.

What can I do in case that the question is anonymous? Nothing really! I could make something with the rating, giving the famous one star. But that would not help the person that has been ill advised! I think that is AskMe’s problem of conscience. At the same time the supervisor should be attentive to experts that are bruited about and getting almost permanently some not very positive criterion and whose answers are under fire again and again. Conclusion: All is not well in Denmark.


Once again. I would not separate these experts. I would make them show color. What could be done? Wouldn’t it be a help if the experts between themselves recommend each other? So you had a list of experts recommended by the experts that are active. All this wouldn’t be necessary if everybody would tell who he is in his answer itself. The rank at this moment is for those who produce not for those qualified! You see it’s really about me. The real expert is the qualified one.

A protective possibility could be a cautioning notice: not all experts on this board are heterosexual. "Please read their biography". And I think it would be a good idea to identify those who give ratings to the rated one so that the rated person could take up a private dialogue with that person if you want. More traffic for

I think that the Catholicism page is not only for only Roman Catholics. We have some distinguished Southern Baptist amongst us. They help to liven up the board together with others, God bless them all! But telling them: "You don’t answer my arguments so let’s drop it here!" is no battering. Or am I wrong in this?

Let the debate continue! But without subterfuges or "ambushes".




Here I add your follow-up.

If you like I can add the following too:

Anonymous asked this follow-up question on 8/25/2000:

mscperu, I have to say that you have completely lost me in where you were going. I do not know if you have read what has been posted in the previous questions and statements or not. What I can say is that NONE of you have addressed the questions that I have put forth. If I have missed your point please let me know. There are several questions out there that I believe need to be addressed. As I have stated before, I am open to all your views, BUT I need the questions answered that I have presented. That is the cold hard facts if you want me to understand where you are coming from! God bless.




Sorry I didn’t give a response in the same order you proffered your statement. You sure missed the points!

Let me resume in short sentences my arguments, questions y suggestions:

- There is no asking for the "so called" right to have a "locked forum". There is no "battering down" of informative answers of experts that "might" (please write: aren’t) Roman Catholic. Observe that your first phrase sports at least four unproved suppositions.

- The debate is not about the meaning of the word Catholic (universal) but about the expectation of people who ask. Generally the newcomer to this board thinks they are on a Roman Catholicism board and expect Roman Catholic answers. See the experiences. It’s not about semantics (= the possible significance of a word); it’s about expectation. So the non-Catholic experts should say what they are or aren’t!

- The use of Scripture references to teach Roman Catholics questioners a doctrine that is not RC teaching and at the same time pretending to be a Catholic expert can’t be ever a legitimating authority to dupe innocent people that ask RC questions. Read the last answer to a RC who wanted simply information of the Jubilee that the RC Church is celebrating. He was given a learned exposé of OT Scripture in order to imply that the Catholic Church is substituting God’s will with base human inventions.

- I note that there have been two other posts that ask how in the world can you attack a learned scriptural exposition? How odd!

- Scripture alone has produced the infinity of denominations because there is no Tradition. Doesn’t that hurt? It’s the characteristic of Catholicism that Tradition is an essential part of the outlook. So you have to answer this question: What guarantee has your own testing against His Word that your interpretation is true? If you have no idea what Tradition is you are fighting against windmills.

- How do you describe the following procedure? I pretend to be a real Catholic – and I’m not - and teach that the Catholic Church is corrupted. I have been called to attention, I have been asked to show color but I continue with my devious procedure because of religious freedom! What name do you call that? Name calling indeed!

- You call rebuke "slander"; does that make your slander a rebuke? Please produce instances of slander.

- Do you want that on this board only debate using Scripture be admitted? That would be narrow. Old Catholics, Orthodox and High-Church see in the Tradition the guidance of the Spirit. Who else could possibly be called Catholic? All those against are protestant.

- What is your denomination?

- Roman Catholic newcomers tend to ask the top expert of ranking. Imagine a non-Catholic being first place. It’s like a travesty occupying the first place on the Sexual Health board.

- Could it be that there is a real problem when serious people again and again call to attention?

- All experts are welcome. But please tell your questioners that you aren’t Catholic.

Happy now?

For further explanations please consult the detailed exposition you can find above.



PS. I suggest again you read the post: "Tradition and Scripture" so you may know what the Catholic experts are talking about. You can’t resume a basic tenet of faith in telegram sentences.






 Where come these questions from?