Calling Oneself Catholic While Rejecting Church Teaching

[Maggyie]

I have a lot of issues with the Church and I don't talk about them here because that's not what the phorum is for.

Nevertheless I used to have this all-or-nothing attitude and I've dropped it. I think we are all better in the Church than out of it. A bad Catholic is better than an ex -Catholic or ex-Christian. Perhaps it's more intellectually consistent to leave but it's better for the soul if one doesn't.

The church is a hospital for sinners and one is more likely to get better in the hospital than out on the street.

[Dr_Asik]

Is today's Church different from the Church of the Apostolic or Patristic ages? Does She believe differently? Does She offer the same witness to the world?

Essentially, the belief is the same, but that doesn't exclude that some doctrines were developed at different times, and it would be somewhat ridiculous to think that the original Apostles held the vast set of precise theological ideas, many relying on philosophical ideas not even available to them, that constitute today's Catholic dogma.

 

[Nihil Obstat]

12. But those whom "the Holy Spirit has placed as bishops to rule the Church of God"(4) gave an almost unanimous affirmative response to both these questions. This "outstanding agreement of the Catholic prelates and the faithful,"(5) affirming that the bodily Assumption of God's Mother into heaven can be defined as a dogma of faith, since it shows us the concordant teaching of the Church's ordinary doctrinal authority and the concordant faith of the Christian people which the same doctrinal authority sustains and directs, thus by itself and in an entirely certain and infallible way, manifests this privilege as a truth revealed by God and contained in that divine deposit which Christ has delivered to his Spouse to be guarded faithfully and to be taught infallibly.(6) Certainly this teaching authority of the Church, not by any merely human effort but under the protection of the Spirit of Truth,(7) and therefore absolutely without error, carries out the commission entrusted to it, that of preserving the revealed truths pure and entire throughout every age, in such a way that it presents them undefiled, adding nothing to them and taking nothing away from them. For, as the Vatican Council teaches, "the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter in such a way that, by his revelation, they might manifest new doctrine, but so that, by his assistance, they might guard as sacred and might faithfully propose the revelation delivered through the apostles, or the deposit of faith."(8) Thus, from the universal agreement of the Church's ordinary teaching authority we have a certain and firm proof, demonstrating that the Blessed Virgin Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven- which surely no faculty of the human mind could know by its own natural powers, as far as the heavenly glorification of the virginal body of the loving Mother of God is concerned-is a truth that has been revealed by God and consequently something that must be firmly and faithfully believed by all children of the Church. For, as the Vatican Council asserts, "all those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the written Word of God or in Tradition, and which are proposed by the Church, either in solemn judgment or in its ordinary and universal teaching office, as divinely revealed truths which must be believed."(9)

[Nihil Obstat]

Essentially, the belief is the same, but that doesn't exclude that some doctrines were developed at different times, and it would be somewhat ridiculous to think that the original Apostles held the vast set of precise theological ideas, many relying on philosophical ideas not even available to them, that constitute today's Catholic dogma.

But what they did have was the entirely of revelation, given to them directly by God.

Otherwise, to assert that a dogma arose in its entirely at a later date, one would deny that revelation ceased at the end of the Apostolic age.

[Credo in Deum]

I have a lot of issues with the Church and I don't talk about them here because that's not what the phorum is for.

Nevertheless I used to have this all-or-nothing attitude and I've dropped it. I think we are all better in the Church than out of it. A bad Catholic is better than an ex -Catholic or ex-Christian. Perhaps it's more intellectually consistent to leave but it's better for the soul if one doesn't.

The church is a hospital for sinners and one is more likely to get better in the hospital than out on the street.

A hospital is a place for those who want to be healed. It's not a place for those who want to stay sick and not listen to their dr. Plus the abuse of medicines can lead to a worse sickness and even death. Do you really think a Catholic who holds heretical beliefs and who participates in the sacraments is in a better standing than one that leaves and does not commit a grave sacrilege by abusing the sacraments? If so, then I must say that's an interesting outlook, Maggie. Edited June 23, 2014 by Credo in Deum

[CrossCuT]

I have a lot of issues with the Church and I don't talk about them here because that's not what the phorum is for.

Nevertheless I used to have this all-or-nothing attitude and I've dropped it. I think we are all better in the Church than out of it. A bad Catholic is better than an ex -Catholic or ex-Christian. Perhaps it's more intellectually consistent to leave but it's better for the soul if one doesn't.

The church is a hospital for sinners and one is more likely to get better in the hospital than out on the street.

 

Im in the same boat as you Maggie. Ill help you paddle.

[Perigrina]

I have a lot of issues with the Church and I don't talk about them here because that's not what the phorum is for.

Nevertheless I used to have this all-or-nothing attitude and I've dropped it. I think we are all better in the Church than out of it. A bad Catholic is better than an ex -Catholic or ex-Christian. Perhaps it's more intellectually consistent to leave but it's better for the soul if one doesn't.

The church is a hospital for sinners and one is more likely to get better in the hospital than out on the street.

 

This is a good point.  I don't think anyone should be telling another that he ought to leave the Church.  But challenging people to face their inconsistency might help them to understand that they need to change.

[CrossCuT]

 I don't think anyone should be telling another that he ought to leave the Church. 

 

Then dont make stupid threads such as this one.

[mortify ii]

Nope, I think I will take my 95% and keep the name "Roman Catholic," regardless of what you say. Whenever somebody asks me what I am, I will proudly declare that I am a Roman Catholic in communion with Rome. If you don't like that, you can go screw yourself.

 

A person can't reject dogma and still be Catholic, and any person that continues to do so is a pathetic fool. It tells me that this person doesn't have the gall to admit to themselves and to others what they really are. Now I'm not sure JohnRyan has actually rejected dogma, he may be referring to some non trivial matters on the periphery. 

[Credo in Deum]

Im in the same boat as you Maggie. Ill help you paddle.

I've always wondered, what is like going up Shitz Creek with a paddle?

[Perigrina]

Then dont make stupid threads such as this one.

 

 

In thread after thread, I see people who call themselves Catholic posting opinions that are not compatible with Catholic teaching.  I really cannot understand why people would do this.  Rather than derail other threads, I put the question here, hoping to get some insight.  I found Maggie's response helpful.

 

I have not told anyone to leave the Church.

Edited June 23, 2014 by Perigrina

[mortify ii]

In thread after thread, I see people who call themselves Catholic posting opinions that are not compatible with Catholic teaching.  I really cannot understand why people would do this.  Rather than derail other threads, I put the question here, hoping to get some insight.  I found Maggie's response helpful.

 

I have not told anyone to leave the Church.

 

People are lame and weak, its easier to just call yourself Catholic, most are lapsed non-believing lechers anyway. 

[CrossCuT]

On that kind note...

[Selah]

I am more annoyed at Dr_Asik. The Assumption, whether you are East or West, is Dogma. Whether she died or not differs...Maronites believe in the Dormition, as do Melkites and perhaps other Eastern Catholics, but you must believe that three days later, the Mother of God was assumed into heaven, her tomb empty. 

 

It's not pick and choose.

[Benedictus]

People are lame and weak, its easier to just call yourself Catholic, most are lapsed non-believing lechers anyway. 

 

The joy of th Gospel lived out :oops:

[Maggyie]

A hospital is a place for those who want to be healed. It's not a place for those who want to stay sick and not listen to their dr. Plus the abuse of medicines can lead to a worse sickness and even death. Do you really think a Catholic who holds heretical beliefs and who participates in the sacraments is in a better standing than one that leaves and does not commit a grave sacrilege by abusing the sacraments? If so, then I must say that's an interesting outlook, Maggie.

You don't have to receive the sacraments to be Catholic. Correction - you must receive baptism to be Catholic.

Yes there's the Easter communion requirement but failing to complete it doesn't make you non-Catholic. It makes you a worse one.

Meanwhile remaining Catholic means you are more likely to attend Mass, pray the rosary, visit the Blessed Sacrament, hang out with other Catholics who hopefully influence you. All good things that could turn it around. Much more so than joining the ranks of seculars or non-denoms.

[fides' Jack]

Well, this all kinda blew up quickly...  Good 'ol Phatmass!

 

 

Nope, I think I will take my 95% and keep the name "Roman Catholic," regardless of what you say. Whenever somebody asks me what I am, I will proudly declare that I am a Roman Catholic in communion with Rome. If you don't like that, you can go screw yourself.

 

Dude, I wasn't trying to attack you.  Just trying to show why your stance doesn't make any sense - at least to me.  That's what the debate table is for.

 

However, there are some truths that the Church teaches, which, if you believe otherwise, knowing what the Church teaches, would make you not in Communion with the Church, as the Church has defined.  So, you're saying someone can be personally in Communion but officially and technically not?  

 

Again, not saying this is you - I'm not sure you've specified what exactly you don't agree with (though I haven't read all the posts here).

 

Language like that doesn't belong on this forum.

 

Well, at least 95% or something. :|

 

I wasn't sure if I should laugh at this or not.  I'm not one for sarcasm.

 

In thread after thread, I see people who call themselves Catholic posting opinions that are not compatible with Catholic teaching.  I really cannot understand why people would do this.  Rather than derail other threads, I put the question here, hoping to get some insight.  I found Maggie's response helpful.

 

I have not told anyone to leave the Church.

 

Nobody here has told anyone to leave the Church, least of all you.

 

But it is a real possibility that certain persons believe they are Catholic (in Communion with the Church), when if fact they are not.

[Perigrina]

You don't have to receive the sacraments to be Catholic. Correction - you must receive baptism to be Catholic.

Yes there's the Easter communion requirement but failing to complete it doesn't make you non-Catholic. It makes you a worse one.

Meanwhile remaining Catholic means you are more likely to attend Mass, pray the rosary, visit the Blessed Sacrament, hang out with other Catholics who hopefully influence you. All good things that could turn it around. Much more so than joining the ranks of seculars or non-denoms.

 

I think that sometimes people who reject Church teaching are lashing out in pain.  I think that it cases like this especially, it makes sense for them to remain Catholic.

[Credo in Deum]

Meanwhile remaining Catholic means you are more likely to attend Mass, pray the rosary, visit the Blessed Sacrament, hang out with other Catholics who hopefully influence you. All good things that could turn it around. Much more so than joining the ranks of seculars or non-denoms.

How do you come to this conclusion? Without the proper disposition what good will come of an obstinate heretic staying in the Church? Obviously the Church doesn't agree with your position since your position would render excommunication pointless if the Church did hold your belief.

[Perigrina]

How do you come to this conclusion? Without the proper disposition what good will come of an obstinate heretic staying in the Church? Obviously the Church doesn't agree with your position since your position would render excommunication pointless if the Church did hold your belief.

 

Not everyone who rejects Church teachings is an obstinate heretic.  Sometimes people take heretical positions but are not formal heretics. It is very difficult to know if somebody is a formal heretic.  It is best to confine one's comments to the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of statements.