Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? (Jimmy Akin article)

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
When I opine on things regarding the Catholic church, my fellow Catholics get angry at me and some of them come after me with as close to "book, bell and candle" as they can.

Because I'm in no position to reform anything about the Church myself, and my fellow Catholics do not agree with me, for the most part, on the things that I think need to be reformed in order to right the ship, my opining in any depth on this subject would do little more than raise some of my fellow Catholics' blood pressure, and who needs that.

The Church leadership are gonna do what they're gonna do. They're not going to ask me. That's for sure. So really, anything I have to say as an individual Catholic is pretty irrelevant. Nobody else on my side cares what I think.
But Vic what is the bishop to do. I’ve seen they can refuse Cuomo and many other pro abortion enabling Catholics from communion.

I think the fact some of the same clergy gave a pass to the likes of the Ted Kennedy and family is now coming back to bite.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yup. Open communion. Almost impossible to be declared a heretic even if I were a full blown Arian these days. Everything is what I want. The cafeteria is open. Do you agree?
I grew up in a large city outside NYC and in a large parish. Somehow pastor priest knew his flock. Probably because most of the families sent their kids to the church’s Catholic school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,319
16,156
Flyoverland
✟1,238,368.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Matthew 18:15-18 comes to mind. Did an individual confront Cuomo? If he refused to listen, did three witnesses confront in love? If he did not listen did they take it to the church? If he will not listen to the church, well you know the rest of the story.

Jesus gave us the guidelines clearly.
Yes. Jesus was emphatic about correction being done, how to do it correctly, and if necessary the exclusion of someone who will not be corrected. Excommunication is quite Biblical. The Church should excommunicate when the situation demands it.

The Catholic Church considers excommunication to be medicinal. Sure we all like Richard Burton reading out the excommunication in Becket. But that is drama and the real thing is less drama and more a quiet exhortation to come around to the truth again. We do not hope for the damnation of the person. There is a bit of frustration with Andrew Cuomo being so blatant about what he has done, and we need to remember that we want him back instead of being driven out forever. But that he cannot remain as things stand now.

 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,319
16,156
Flyoverland
✟1,238,368.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
But Vic what is the bishop to do. I’ve seen they can refuse Cuomo and many other pro abortion enabling Catholics from communion.

I think the fact some of the same clergy gave a pass to the likes of the Ted Kennedy and family is now coming back to bite.
If the bishop has a pair he can speak truth to power. If he doesn't, he can say some platitudinous thing and do noting.

There have been some instances of applying canon 915 to US politicians. Actually Andrew Cuomo has already been advised to avoid communion because of a different matter. I think archbishop Cordileone did the same for Nancy Pelosi, yet she flouts it wherever possible. I think Joe Biden and John Kerry were also told that by their bishops. But canon 915 is not actually about excommunication but of sanctions short of excommunication.

Andrew Cuomo's father Mario claimed to be a good Catholic and claimed in a quite famous speech that he was personally opposed to abortion but for the sake of his state he would promote and sign such legislation, That was the speech that gave intellectual cover for a generation of erstwhile Catholics to come out as pro-abortion. But you are right that it went back to the Kennedy clan.

It was Ted Kennedy that once said (in 1971): ‘When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.’

But then politics happened. There was money to be had for supporting abortion. But I would not discount dissident theology done at Hyannisport. What happened there is salient, as major a mutation of Catholic moral theology as the Land-O-Lakes conference was for mutating Catholic education.

"The former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen, emeritus professor of ethics at the University of Washington, recalls the meeting in his book “The Birth of Bioethics” (Oxford, 2003). He writes about how he joined with the Rev. Joseph Fuchs, a Catholic moral theologian; the Rev. Robert Drinan, then dean of Boston College Law School; and three academic theologians, the Revs. Giles Milhaven, Richard McCormick and Charles Curran, to enable the Kennedy family to redefine support for abortion." https://patrickmadrid.com/sons-of-p...lic-priests-turned-the-kennedys-pro-abortion/

The intent was to make it possible for a Catholic politician to safely vote for abortion. And Teddy Kennedy did just that. Cuomo merely followed suit a few years later. And his son, the fruit rolling even farther from the tree, promoted and signed into law a measure that is so bad that the hills cry out to God for justice to be done.

There is no evidence that his brothers Jack or Bobby would have done that. Bobby was apparently an actual Catholic, like Eunice was, and Sargent Schriver, her husband. Jack, way back at his speech before the Greater Houston Ministerial association, indicated that his faith was not so important to him, and that it would take a back seat to his politics. THAT was a fatal flaw. And that fatal flaw is well explained by archbishop Chaput, who went to the same place in Houston where Kennedy gave his famous speech. Chaput's speech is worth remembering, worth reading three or four times to grasp what a mess JFK started. The Vocation of Christians in American Public Life

JFK put his faith second to his politics, and he did so to convince anti-Catholic Protestants that he wouldn't be as bad as they thought. He sold a bit of his soul in the process. But he won the election, which mattered most to him. Teddy Kennedy sold his whole soul to go along with those sons of perdition, Fuchs and Drinan and McCormick and Curran and their promotion of abortion. Mario Cuomo intellectualized it ever so sweetly, and his son threw what faith he inherited to the wind, finding it worthless to him, and supported abortion all the way to infanticide, No 'personally opposed but' language from him.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,678
18,559
Orlando, Florida
✟1,262,320.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
The ECLA has contradictory beliefs on the sanctity of human life in the womb.

Excerpt:

After setting the stage for moral deliberation over abortion and acknowledging the controversial, potentially divisive character of the issue, the statement explains the convictions of our faith, on which we base judgments on abortion:
• Human beings are endowed with dignity, created in God’s image, and they bear the responsibility of stewardship;
• The gift of human life comes from God, has intrinsic value, worth and dignity in all phases of development, and is guided by God’s law;
• Sin has corrupted God’s creation, leaving us “caught up in a web of sin in which we both sin and are sinned against” (p. 3);
• God calls us to lives of repentance and renewal, seeking to manifest the fruit of the Spirit; and
• As a community of forgiven sinners, “our love for neighbor embraces especially those who are most vulnerable, including both the pregnant woman and the life in her womb” (p.3).
The social statement describes how this church, as a community supportive of life,
responds to the reality of abortion. Its fundamental judgment about abortion is that: “Abortion ought to be an option only of last resort. Therefore, as a church we seek to reduce the need to turn to abortion as the answer to unintended pregnancies” (p.4). We “live out our support for life in all its dimensions” (p.4) through hospitality, keeping sexual intercourse in its proper setting and using contraception, action and education. By contrast, attitudes such as irresponsible sexual activity, individualism and materialism are life-degrading.
The statement reminds this church of its call to be a compassionate community that recognizes the moral complexity of individual situations. In most circumstances, the church encourages women with unintended pregnancies to continue the pregnancy while assessing the situation realistically and considering adoption as a positive option.
When considering ending a pregnancy, a woman or couple should consider factors such as unwilling participation in the sexual act leading to conception, threat to the life of the mother,


and severe fetal abnormalities. However, “This church opposes ending intrauterine life when a fetus is developed enough to live outside a uterus with the aid of reasonable and necessary technology” (p. 7).
The statement also speaks of public policy issues related to abortion. The ELCA participates in public debate about abortion while seeking justice for all. It advocates aid in preventing unwanted pregnancies, through education and contraception. Next, it supports a better life for the child and parents through improved social services and initiatives such as parental leave.
Regulation of abortion, the statement recognizes, is where members of this church disagree widely. The statement declares that the government has a legitimate role in regulating abortion. It states, “Because of our conviction that both the life of the woman and the life in her womb must be respected by law, this church opposes:
• the total lack of regulation of abortion;
• legislation that would outlaw abortion in all circumstances;
• laws that prevent access to information about all options available to women faced with
unintended pregnancies;
• laws that deny access to safe and affordable services for morally justifiable abortions;
• mandatory or coerced abortion or sterilization;
• laws that prevent couples from practicing contraception;
• laws that are primarily intended to harass those contemplating or deciding for an
abortion” (pp. 9-10).

http://download.elca.org/ELCA Resource Repository/AbortionSS_Summary.pdf

1) What you see as contradictory, we see as acknowledging a difficult and complex issue.

2) Our social statements are meant to inspire thoughtful reflection, but they have no juridical authority. We do not expect people to be obedient robots without personal ethical deliberation. Only our constitution has juridical authority
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
1) What you see as contradictory, we see as acknowledging a difficult and complex issue.

2) Our social statements are meant to inspire thoughtful reflection, but they have no juridical authority. We do not expect people to be obedient robots without personal ethical deliberation. Only our constitution has juridical authority
Would you like to address the contradiction?
 
Upvote 0

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But Vic what is the bishop to do. I’ve seen they can refuse Cuomo and many other pro abortion enabling Catholics from communion.

I think the fact some of the same clergy gave a pass to the likes of the Ted Kennedy and family is now coming back to bite.

The Bishop is to grind his teeth, state his personal disagreement, warn darkly, and then leave it to God.

What more can he do, realistically? Sure, he could "draw a gun", so to speak, and blow off his own foot. Pretty sure that won't accomplish anything. The hardcore always want to take maximal action. That can work. But then again, that can be the equivalent of "Life's short, let's get it over with."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Chuckling a bit at how you said that but you are right. I’m told often on some other threads the doctrine never changes.

You know why, despite the fact that over at CAF they're Modernist/Liberal, they maintain that the teachings of the Church has never changed? It's because belief that teachings have changed destroys the myth of the infallibility of the Church. And both the people who run CAF and the Magisterium of the Church will spin, deny, and play word games to keep that belief from taking root.

If a teaching has been changed it means one of two things: Either the Church was teaching error before and the change in teaching corrected it; or the Church was teaching truth before and is now, after the change, teaching error. If at any point in time the Church teaches error, then it can't be infallible.

Destroy the myth of infallibility and you decimate that portion of the Catholic laity that is devout and attends Mass regularly.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

Athanasius377

Is playing with his Tonka truck.
Site Supporter
Apr 22, 2017
1,371
1,515
Cincinnati
✟708,093.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Now, if you were to go over to Catholic Answers Forum and say that the Catholic Church has changed it's teaching, you'd set off a crapstorm of epic proportions and would probably be banned.
Not true. You wouldn’t probably be banned, you most definitely would be banned. I know that for a fact. ;)
 
Upvote 0

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You know why, despite the fact that over at CAF they're Modernist/Liberal, they maintain that the teachings of the Church has never changed? It's because belief that teachings have changed destroys the myth of the infallibility of the Church. And both the people who run CAF and the Magisterium of the Church will spin, deny, and play word games to keep that belief from taking root.

If a teaching has been changed it means one of two things: Either the Church was teaching error before and the change in teaching corrected it; or the Church was teaching truth before and is now, after the change, teaching error. If at any point in time the Church teaches error, then it can't be infallible.

Destroy the myth of infallibility and you decimate that portion of the Catholic laity that is devout and attends Mass regularly.

Not really. Catholics do not think about God and the Church in terms of formal debate. Infallibility is something that the clergy and the intellectuals, and people outside of the Church, worry about. The lay Catholic's relationship with God is very foreign to the form of logic that you express here. Catholics simply are not Protestants, and don't think about God using formal logic. Catholics are superstitiously devout creatures. Their leaders in the clergy have a certain polished intellectual approach and legalistic argumentation, but Catholics don't listen to their leaders all that much. Never have.

Catholicism is a culture, like Judaism. It's not a set of logical precepts that flow one from the other. Catholics grew up in Catholicism from infancy, and don't think through their faith, they feel it, and that is good enough.

Catholics are like Jews, not like Protestants. It's impossible for somebody who comes to religion through logical precepts and argumentations to really get it, but it's really easy for Catholics to see when people talking about them have missed the boat.

Honestly, truly, most Catholics don't really think that the Church is "infallible", and they don't care either way. The clergy care about those things, intensely, but the clergy are either asexual or perverse males - not like everybody else - apart. The things they think about are different from what Catholics feel about.

Yes, there are some Catholic men who get scholastic and very much like Protestants, but most practicing Catholics are women, and women everywhere all practice religion with their fingers crossed.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Not really. Catholics do not think about God and the Church in terms of formal debate. Infallibility is something that the clergy and the intellectuals, and people outside of the Church, worry about. The lay Catholic's relationship with God is very foreign to the form of logic that you express here. Catholics simply are not Protestants, and don't think about God using formal logic. Catholics are superstitiously devout creatures. Their leaders in the clergy have a certain polished intellectual approach and legalistic argumentation, but Catholics don't listen to their leaders all that much. Never have.

Catholicism is a culture, like Judaism. It's not a set of logical precepts that flow one from the other. Catholics grew up in Catholicism from infancy, and don't think through their faith, they feel it, and that is good enough.

Catholics are like Jews, not like Protestants. It's impossible for somebody who comes to religion through logical precepts and argumentations to really get it, but it's really easy for Catholics to see when people talking about them have missed the boat.

Honestly, truly, most Catholics don't really think that the Church is "infallible", and they don't care either way. The clergy care about those things, intensely, but the clergy are either asexual or perverse males - not like everybody else - apart. The things they think about are different from what Catholics feel about.

Yes, there are some Catholic men who get scholastic and very much like Protestants, but most practicing Catholics are women, and women everywhere all practice religion with their fingers crossed.
Ahem. I WAS a cradle Catholic. And while what you say may be true in the liberal/cafeteria Catholic circles you circulate in, those are most definitely NOT the people I was talking about.
 
Upvote 0

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ahem. I WAS a cradle Catholic. And while what you say may be true in the liberal/cafeteria Catholic circles you circulate in, those are most definitely NOT the people I was talking about.

You left. You may have been a cradle Catholic, but you decided that logical religion was your focus, not that feeling of being part of God's family. You probably never really felt that, so you left. You weren't really part of the people you left, you don't share their emotionalism, which is why you're not part of them, and don't understand them.
 
Upvote 0

Athanasius377

Is playing with his Tonka truck.
Site Supporter
Apr 22, 2017
1,371
1,515
Cincinnati
✟708,093.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
You know why, despite the fact that over at CAF they're Modernist/Liberal, they maintain that the teachings of the Church has never changed? It's because belief that teachings have changed destroys the myth of the infallibility of the Church. And both the people who run CAF and the Magisterium of the Church will spin, deny, and play word games to keep that belief from taking root.

If a teaching has been changed it means one of two things: Either the Church was teaching error before and the change in teaching corrected it; or the Church was teaching truth before and is now, after the change, teaching error. If at any point in time the Church teaches error, then it can't be infallible.

Destroy the myth of infallibility and you decimate that portion of the Catholic laity that is devout and attends Mass regularly.
I agree. Many moons ago I became disillusioned with the RCC and started attending an SSPV chapel that offered the traditional Latin Mass thinking this would help so I could stay in the RCC (at least in my mind). That didn’t help. In fact it made my situation worse because I saw firsthand what I think you’re saying. That is one cannot go to a traditional Latin Mass and hear what is being taught and then go to a modern average parish today and think it’s the same religion because it’s not. I don’t mean denomination I mean it’s a different religion altogether. Which one is true I couldn’t figure out but I do know for sure it mortally wounded the idea of an infalliable church with an infallible magestirium. And that was before I started researching church history.
It is for that reason I am convinced CAF is not for Protestants it’s for the RCC to keep them from leaving.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Concord1968
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I agree. Many moons ago I became disillusioned with the RCC and started attending an SSPV chapel that offered the traditional Latin Mass thinking this would help so I could stay in the RCC (at least in my mind). That didn’t help. In fact it made my situation worse because I saw firsthand what I think you’re saying. That is one cannot go to a traditional Latin Mass and hear what is being taught and then go to a modern average parish today and think it’s the same religion because it’s not. I don’t mean denomination I mean it’s a different religion altogether. Which one is true I couldn’t figure out but I do know for sure it mortally wounded the idea of an infalliable church with an infallible magestirium. And that was before I started researching church history.
It is for that reason I am convinced CAF is not for Protestants it’s for the RCC to keep them from leaving.
Agreed 100%. I flirted with Trad Catholicism for a while, but ultimately I came to the conclusion that both sides of the Vat II divide were lying to me about the infallibility of the Church. And you're absolutely right: They ARE two different religions. At that point I started asking questions like "What else are they lying to me about?". It was a short step from there to investigating the claims of Martin Luther. I came to the conclusion that Luther was dead accurate about Romans.

It helped, too, that my wife grew up LCMS so I had a soft landing.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

Athanasius377

Is playing with his Tonka truck.
Site Supporter
Apr 22, 2017
1,371
1,515
Cincinnati
✟708,093.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Not really. Catholics do not think about God and the Church in terms of formal debate. Infallibility is something that the clergy and the intellectuals, and people outside of the Church, worry about. The lay Catholic's relationship with God is very foreign to the form of logic that you express here. Catholics simply are not Protestants, and don't think about God using formal logic. Catholics are superstitiously devout creatures. Their leaders in the clergy have a certain polished intellectual approach and legalistic argumentation, but Catholics don't listen to their leaders all that much. Never have.

Catholicism is a culture, like Judaism. It's not a set of logical precepts that flow one from the other. Catholics grew up in Catholicism from infancy, and don't think through their faith, they feel it, and that is good enough.

Catholics are like Jews, not like Protestants. It's impossible for somebody who comes to religion through logical precepts and argumentations to really get it, but it's really easy for Catholics to see when people talking about them have missed the boat.

Honestly, truly, most Catholics don't really think that the Church is "infallible", and they don't care either way. The clergy care about those things, intensely, but the clergy are either asexual or perverse males - not like everybody else - apart. The things they think about are different from what Catholics feel about.

Yes, there are some Catholic men who get scholastic and very much like Protestants, but most practicing Catholics are women, and women everywhere all practice religion with their fingers crossed.

While I disagree with the premise about logic I actually think you are closer to how most RCC's feel about their church than the numerous apologists I see on this site. In other words I think you are trying your best to be honest with the situation the RCC finds itself in without resorting to leaving the RCC altogether. I appreciate the honesty and usually read your posts because you have a history of this behavior. I was not able to ignore the problems with the RCC but I also sense the struggle many RCC's feel to stay in the family as you put. To be fair, I think there are many a protestant that are protestant because of culture than I would like to admit so I don't think your characterization is as deep as might appear on the surface. I for one believe that we can have a genuinely Christian culture while at the same time be able to defend the faith using logic and sound arguments. But alas, that's a discussion for another post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

concretecamper

Member of His Church
Nov 23, 2013
6,787
2,580
PA
✟275,202.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
“The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts.”
St. John Chrysostom


Unfortunately, many Catholics lack the knowledge of what the Church actually teaches. They dont do the work, rather they are lazy and follow errant teachers, then become disillusioned, and finally leave His Church.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,319
16,156
Flyoverland
✟1,238,368.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
The Bishop is to grind his teeth, state his personal disagreement, warn darkly, and then leave it to God.

What more can he do, realistically? Sure, he could "draw a gun", so to speak, and blow off his own foot. Pretty sure that won't accomplish anything. The hardcore always want to take maximal action. That can work. But then again, that can be the equivalent of "Life's short, let's get it over with."
A bishop should not be grinding his teeth at all. He should be more serene in his faith than that. Nor should he be stating his personal disagreement. We don't particularly need his personal opinions. He should be speaking for the Church and not himself. If he warns, it should be a warning that Christ Himself would have given. As a shepherd he keeps the flock together and keeps the wolves out. Here it is useful to consider what Jesus said about true shepherds and hireling shepherds. We have many hireling shepherds who want their own comfort. A shepherd should be willing to die for his flock. Not pasture himself on his flock, as some like McCarrick have done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,319
16,156
Flyoverland
✟1,238,368.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Not really. Catholics do not think about God and the Church in terms of formal debate. Infallibility is something that the clergy and the intellectuals, and people outside of the Church, worry about. The lay Catholic's relationship with God is very foreign to the form of logic that you express here. Catholics simply are not Protestants, and don't think about God using formal logic. Catholics are superstitiously devout creatures. Their leaders in the clergy have a certain polished intellectual approach and legalistic argumentation, but Catholics don't listen to their leaders all that much. Never have.

Catholicism is a culture, like Judaism. It's not a set of logical precepts that flow one from the other. Catholics grew up in Catholicism from infancy, and don't think through their faith, they feel it, and that is good enough.

Catholics are like Jews, not like Protestants. It's impossible for somebody who comes to religion through logical precepts and argumentations to really get it, but it's really easy for Catholics to see when people talking about them have missed the boat.

Honestly, truly, most Catholics don't really think that the Church is "infallible", and they don't care either way. The clergy care about those things, intensely, but the clergy are either asexual or perverse males - not like everybody else - apart. The things they think about are different from what Catholics feel about.

Yes, there are some Catholic men who get scholastic and very much like Protestants, but most practicing Catholics are women, and women everywhere all practice religion with their fingers crossed.
There is something to this. Martin Buber's 'Two Types of Faith' addresses it nicely, with Catholics on average being much much more like Jews on average than Protestants on average. He was too reductive in that book so as to make his point, as these types are more mixed up with each other in reality. Catholicism has a rationality that is too deep for a Bible only logician to see, and it only maddens them because they just can't go that deep. Protestantism has a subjectivity that the Bible only logicians can't see even though it is right in front of them all the time. Doesn't fit their presuppositions how they actually live their own faith. Jews and Catholics are more comfortable in that space, consequently they look to the Bible and their faith in a very different way. Not denying reason but not being simplistic logicians either.
 
Upvote 0