Catholic Divisions

[dairygirl4u2c]

If I were to make an initial argument for the CC, it would be mostly what the above people are saying regarding how people don't follow set rules. That doesn't disprove the CC, it simply shows people fall short. I'd say that for most of your concerns.

Then you also seem to have concerns for what exactly the rules are. With this in mind, I too have beefs, of course I would being another ex-Catholic, because of that notion of the "ordinary magisterium". The set rules are in the Catechism and fall into the first paragraph here, and everything else is sorta just implied. Of course I don't like that because it can change. If infalibility is true, it's not so much that the infallible teaching changed, it's that something that was thought to be a teaching never really was. Sort of like thinking the earth was flat or something. Most Catholics will say you have to follow the implied beliefs anyway but I would imagine the best argument in favor of the CC for these implied beliefs is that you have to discern them for yourself.

Another beef you brought up was that I found insightful was
[quote]So the parish I should be attending because of geography, I'm not really a member of community. It's more drive thru for the Sacraments cause it's about me and not community where they hold hands, have lifeteen, play guitars, don't genuflect and recieve on the tongue, don't have an adoration chapels, looks 'protestant'. etc?[/quote]

You have a good point. If I were defending the CC I would say that if the people are doing things that are implied or uncertain as wrong, it's probably not a big deal. If they are doing things that are definitely wrong, you can't commune with them fully, but the beauty would be that you commune as much as you can despite your dispute. That way the Church doesn't turn into a bunch of varying beliefs like the Prots are today. Now, I can see a good in that. For me not defending though, I would say that that's not necessarily a bad thing because somethings just shouldn't be made into rules. Unity dispite dispute is common in Prots more than Caths will admit. It's sorta goes back to that Easter dispute in the early Church. Rome thought it should excommunicate people who didn't follow the norm, for unities sake etc I would imagine, but the people getting excommunicated told Rome that Rome should not fool itself and that it has excommunicated itself from everyone else. I guess some would argue that there's MORE unity in the CC dispite dispute than the varying Prots. Are the themes unitying Catholics that cannot unite Prots really that necessary or even true?
So really, for this point it all depends on how you look at it I suppose.

Edited May 6, 2006 by dairygirl4u2c

[Akalyte]

Jas, none of us are perfectly good Catholics. We all fall. But that's no excuse to leave the Church. I know you man, and you know me. I remember your posts in the past! You were a great Catholic! The Church is still beautiful. It still has the fullness of truth. No matter how many weak human beings it contains.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='973573' date='May 6 2006, 10:21 AM']
Jas, none of us are perfectly good Catholics. We all fall. But that's no excuse to leave the Church. I know you man, and you know me. I remember your posts in the past! You were a great Catholic! The Church is still beautiful. It still has the fullness of truth. No matter how many weak human beings it contains.[/quote]I am a better man and a better Christian than who I was 3 years ago. Sorry, you didn't know me. As far as my Catholic status, I'm just more honest now because I'm more knowledgeable.

[amandaplus5]

Out of curiousity, how did you go from being a strong Catholic to being on the other end of the spectrum?

[dairygirl4u2c]

So what's your stance really for being exCatho? For me, it's the CC could possibly be construed as true from historical fact, but the facts to me seem to point the other way. See "no salvation outside the CC" or the Photius threads etc from me for more info. I suppose when it comes down to it also, beyond the facts which are enough for me not to be Catho, I disagree with some of the teachings, so any historical uncertainty which could go either way will go against the CC because we all have to decide when looking into the CC's validity.

It'd seem that your stance would be like mine regarding uncertainty and things you disagree with. I'm not sure though because you don't discuss historical uncertainty etc. All I see you do point out things you disagree with, but not noting how the CC has contradicted itself or proved itself wrong. I don't know, simply saying that you disagree with the CC out of personal preference if that's your stance doesn't seem to sit well with me. It'd seem you should base things from more of a historical basis, or at least have some sort of objective basis or at least speculation.

I say that because the arguments being made against your arguments I think refute yours, because the people are sinners. If a Church like the the CC is true, and the people can be sinners, which seems to be a reasonable stance, then your arguments are notable but not anything which can discount the validity of a true Church. You need some more objective basis to add to your speculation about the sinners and uncertainty you mentioned. Without my objective speculation, I would give the benefit of the doubt to the CC with the arguments mentioned by you.

Edited May 6, 2006 by dairygirl4u2c

[Catholic Fanatic]

The facts do speak for themselves. My Church is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church mentioned in the Bible and started by Jesus Christ in 33AD. The Church of JasJis is a sham which started whenever he was born. He speaks only of minor issues of the sinners in the Church instead of attacking the Church objectively. His arguments have been shown to be irrational as reasons to leave against the proofs for the Church. He knows he cannot disprove the Church, and that the Church proves itself, so he persists in his feigned blindness. If his pride or other motives are causing him to leave sinnfully, he should stop those vices. If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off. He knows he is headed for eternal damnation, where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth. The Terrible Judge will call to Himself Jas and will have him killed, the same way Christ said he would call sinners to Himself and have them killed in the Gosple of Luke. Jas will not be released until he has paid the last penny.

Edited May 6, 2006 by Catholic Fanatic

[jasJis]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='973629' date='May 6 2006, 11:44 AM']
It'd seem you should base things from more of a historical basis, or at least have some sort of objective basis or at least speculation.

I say that because the arguments being made against your arguments I think refute yours, because the people are sinners. If a Church like the the CC is true, and the people can be sinners, which seems to be a reasonable stance, then your arguments are notable but not anything which can discount the validity of a true Church. You need some more objective basis to add to your speculation about the sinners and uncertainty you mentioned. Without my objective speculation, I would give the benefit of the doubt to the CC with the arguments mentioned by you.[/quote]LOL. Half the time I don't understand What in the Hell you are talking about, but I understand you loud and clear. My problem stems with hair splitting rules that has become the Catholic Church here on earth. Maybe it's my misperception based on my experiences here. Let's start from the fundamentals. God is good and the only God. He created us with free will. Free will let's us choose good or evil. God tolerates the presence of evil because Free Will means we have to have a choice. To compensate for the damge and death evil does, God heals and re-births for good. By becoming Man and God incarnate, God experienced all the evil we can do to 'earn' and justify His mercy. God is constantly present with us via the Holy Spirit. Despite me putting this all in a few sentences, I don't think most Christians would have too much problem with that. (Though of course, here at pm, there will be a dozen posts 'clarifying and correcting' me because of their theological studies and degrees.) Peter was a fisherman, Paul was the scholar. Who became 'pope'?

Religion is a human institution that transmits and preserves Divine Knowledge of God. Basically so we don't all have to re-create the world. That's Tradition. Disposing of that Tradition, you end up with all these wacky prot religions. Fine. Let's preserve Tradition. So then we have a Tradtional religion. What part of that Tradition do we keep or let go? The part that says God loves us and became Man seems reasonable and Right. The lack of this Traditional Knowledge knocks the Mormons out. What about the Tradition of the Supper? Do we do it in homes? What's the understanding of that? Circumcise, or not as Paul and Peter had to resove? The Tradition Religion has to have some sort of discerning athority, doesn't it? People are reading this and saying jas is talking himself right into the Catholic Church. I'm not.

Here's my stumbling block. The Church 'athority' has done alot of wrong things because of the human element. Are Jews accursed or not? Are they condemned or not? Is the NO Mass an abomination against Tradition or not? Should Confirmation and Communion be administered at Birth like in the Eastern Church, or staged out like the Western Church? Should Sacraments be 3 seperate acts of Initiation into the Church or 3 parts of one Sacrament? Who to believe? Where does the Church's real ability to be 'infalible' begin or end in these matters? Do the 'faithful' have to be theological experts to figure it out?

Then, looking at the human element of the Church and it being a civil power on Earth, it's power is then open to abuse by mere humans like you and I. Be careful how you question Church authority. It may get you burned at the stake, ostracized in society, condemned to hell. If you want that power, become a clergyman. History shows how this was repeatedly done. Even at low levels today. The Church needs to curb that, but it's done a very poor job at it. Bad priests are one thing, bad bishops, cardinals, and popes are another. Luther was right about the abuse of power. But if you discount the leaders too much, you end up with 30,000 denoms and two different baptist churches accross the street from each other.

I'm a big believer that the truth coming from humans is somewhere in the middle of what people are willing and able to tell you and you have a bit of common sense and the sure knowledge you just won't know for sure.

I see the Church as having two natures. The Divine nature is protected always by God. Grace here on earth is ensured. The Temporal nature is humanity's free will. Church leaders and congregation are imperfect, with free will, and often have their own agendas. How do we tell when the Church's judgement is Divine and perfect or human and possibly imperfect? We humans are imperfect and do our best to discern where to draw that line. We also make judgements about what the 'religion' leaders do or say or teach.

The line I draw and the line the temporal Catholic Church draws has us separated. The problem is where does God draw the line? If I discard the Church's line, I risk blinding myself. If I discard my line for just the Church's, I risk lying to myself. What I'm having a hell of a time is discerning whether the human nature of the Church or the Divine nature of the Church is drawing the line. Should I move my line or am I on the right side?

[AngelofJesus]

Jas,

I agree with everything you have said in this thread. Some of what you have said had been profound questions that I had prior to my becoming devout. I had let myself get caught up in the semantics of how it is to be catholic. From reading arguing and discussing with you, I know that you are very knowlegeable of the catholic faith. Much more than most of us. That's why I get shocked when you post and claim that you are not catholic. Being a good scholar of the church does not guarantee that you will be saved anyway. A doctor of the church St. Therese of Liseiux did not read much except the bible and The imitation of Christ.
What's the point learning all things scholarly? When all Jesus wants is for you to love Him and from that you will learn to love your neighbor. There is not greater virtue than love as you know. You add the Holy Eucharist and reconciliation and you're there. Easy. No need to complicate your life nor your faith.

Your brother in Christ,

AoJ

[jasJis]

AoJ,
Are you a member of the same Catholic Church that Catholic Fanatic belongs to? Which of you is right?

[AngelofJesus]

Jas,

I believe that condemning you and saying that you wil go to hell is not anybody's job. The greatest hurt that we cause Jesus is not that we sin, it is because that we doubt His mercy and love. He wants us to abandon ourselves to him by leaving everything to Him. Maybe the reason that you have this feelings about the church is because he wants you to evaluate your priorities. What is the most important thing? Your salvation. Who can give that to you? Jesus. How do you get it? Loving Him. How can you love Him? Abandon yourself to Him. Let him lead you.

I was led back to the church by Jesus because I trusted him. Period.

I have to go, I will be back later. My wife beckons. Teehee.

Your brother in Christ,

AoJ

[ReinnieR]

[quote name='jasJis' post='973687' date='May 6 2006, 02:16 PM']
LOL. Half the time I don't understand What in the Hell you are talking about, but I understand you loud and clear. My problem stems with hair splitting rules that has become the Catholic Church here on earth. Maybe it's my misperception based on my experiences here. Let's start from the fundamentals. God is good and the only God. He created us with free will. Free will let's us choose good or evil. God tolerates the presence of evil because Free Will means we have to have a choice. To compensate for the damge and death evil does, God heals and re-births for good. By becoming Man and God incarnate, God experienced all the evil we can do to 'earn' and justify His mercy. God is constantly present with us via the Holy Spirit. Despite me putting this all in a few sentences, I don't think most Christians would have too much problem with that. (Though of course, here at pm, there will be a dozen posts 'clarifying and correcting' me because of their theological studies and degrees.) Peter was a fisherman, Paul was the scholar. Who became 'pope'?

Religion is a human institution that transmits and preserves Divine Knowledge of God. Basically so we don't all have to re-create the world. That's Tradition. Disposing of that Tradition, you end up with all these wacky prot religions. Fine. Let's preserve Tradition. So then we have a Tradtional religion. What part of that Tradition do we keep or let go? The part that says God loves us and became Man seems reasonable and Right. The lack of this Traditional Knowledge knocks the Mormons out. What about the Tradition of the Supper? Do we do it in homes? What's the understanding of that? Circumcise, or not as Paul and Peter had to resove? The Tradition Religion has to have some sort of discerning athority, doesn't it? People are reading this and saying jas is talking himself right into the Catholic Church. I'm not.

Here's my stumbling block. The Church 'athority' has done alot of wrong things because of the human element. Are Jews accursed or not? Are they condemned or not? Is the NO Mass an abomination against Tradition or not? Should Confirmation and Communion be administered at Birth like in the Eastern Church, or staged out like the Western Church? Should Sacraments be 3 seperate acts of Initiation into the Church or 3 parts of one Sacrament? Who to believe? Where does the Church's real ability to be 'infalible' begin or end in these matters? Do the 'faithful' have to be theological experts to figure it out?

Then, looking at the human element of the Church and it being a civil power on Earth, it's power is then open to abuse by mere humans like you and I. Be careful how you question Church authority. It may get you burned at the stake, ostracized in society, condemned to hell. If you want that power, become a clergyman. History shows how this was repeatedly done. Even at low levels today. The Church needs to curb that, but it's done a very poor job at it. Bad priests are one thing, bad bishops, cardinals, and popes are another. Luther was right about the abuse of power. But if you discount the leaders too much, you end up with 30,000 denoms and two different baptist churches accross the street from each other.

I'm a big believer that the truth coming from humans is somewhere in the middle of what people are willing and able to tell you and you have a bit of common sense and the sure knowledge you just won't know for sure.

I see the Church as having two natures. The Divine nature is protected always by God. Grace here on earth is ensured. The Temporal nature is humanity's free will. Church leaders and congregation are imperfect, with free will, and often have their own agendas. How do we tell when the Church's judgement is Divine and perfect or human and possibly imperfect? We humans are imperfect and do our best to discern where to draw that line. We also make judgements about what the 'religion' leaders do or say or teach.

The line I draw and the line the temporal Catholic Church draws has us separated. The problem is where does God draw the line? If I discard the Church's line, I risk blinding myself. If I discard my line for just the Church's, I risk lying to myself. What I'm having a hell of a time is discerning whether the human nature of the Church or the Divine nature of the Church is drawing the line. Should I move my line or am I on the right side?
[/quote]


you have no problem witht the magisterium. i know you see it so clear where to draw the line.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='jasJis' post='973687' date='May 6 2006, 05:16 PM']

The line I draw and the line the temporal Catholic Church draws has us separated. The problem is where does God draw the line? If I discard the Church's line, I risk blinding myself. If I discard my line for just the Church's, I risk lying to myself. What I'm having a hell of a time is discerning whether the human nature of the Church or the Divine nature of the Church is drawing the line. Should I move my line or am I on the right side?
[/quote]

[img]http://www.cjamesadams.com/images/passionofchrist.jpg[/img]
[font="Garamond"]
[size=4]
"Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." [/size][/font]

Christ, the lamb, won the right to establish His Church, and in doing so, gaves his apostles the power of binding and loosing in his physical absence. The moral law of the Church are only a bunch of stiffling rules if they conflict with what Jas wants, rather than the absolute will of God. So what is it, is it all relative? Is it going to be Jas' wisdom or the wisdom of God?

You know these things.

[Socrates]

[quote name='jasJis' post='973342' date='May 6 2006, 06:13 AM']
In another thread, a prot 'jesuspaidtheprice' brought up a point that wasn't seriously debunked, debated, or discussed.

What about the divided Catholic Church?

Look at the animosity between "Trads" and "Libs" whithin the Church.

What about the animosity about holding hands during the Our Father? It's not like the congregation are disobeying the priest in all these parishes.

What about the "disapproval" of many Caths regarding recieving in the hand instead of on the tongue?

Why are there so many nuns with "wacky" ideas for liturgies and stuff?

Why has the American Church bishops strayed so far from what Trad Caths claim is correct teaching?

How can a bishop get married by Rev. Moon?

How can priests engage in active homosexuality and remain priests?

How can Bishops promote condoms if condoms are so wrong?

How can their be such questions about the various translations of the Bible that are approved by the Church but some be called 'heretical' by learned and faithful Catholics?

Why the ambiguity of the Grace of Infallibiltiy in actual application. Is it this Papal decree, or that one, or this one here, the Beatificaiont of Simon, the deomtion of Simon, woman Can't be priest infallible or not?

Why does it seem a Catholic has to be a degreed theologian, a certified canon lawyer, a registered mystic, an accredited philosopher, to even hope that their understanding is 'correct'?

Why is it that you couldn't get any 4 Catholics here at phatmass to all agree on an answer to a significant question?

I'm being dead serious here. I've been told plenty of times by people here that I have to come 'home' to the Church or I'm condemned to hell. (Turn or burn ) I've been told the Church is the Pillar of Truth.

What EXACTLY is the "TRUTH" I am to return to that I don't have where I am? The TRUTH that God loves me and I NEED His Mercy that is part of His Justice? I've got that. I am totally at His Mercy. Where am I finding additional "TRUTH" from the Catholic Church? From the priest who has LifeTeen kids on the Altar? From Bishop Lefebe? From the Bishop of LA? From Cardinal form the Boston area? From the videos of Bishop Sheen? From [u]which[/u] Pope Urban or Alexander or John Paul or Benedict?

[u]Inquiring souls want to know.[/u]
[/quote]
You're making things too hard on yourself here.
The simple truth is that real truth of the Catholic Faith can be found by looking to the Pope, Benedict XVI, the Bishop of Rome, the Supreme Pontiff who sits in the Chair of St. Peter, when he teaches throught the magisterium of the Church.

He alone is granted the charism of infalliblity in teaching - not Lefebre, not Cardinal Mahoney, not posters on Phatmass.

When Catholics teach in union with the Pope, they teach the truth. When they break from the magisterium by making contrary teachings, they do not. Yes, there are many heretics in the Church, on both the "Left" and the "Right."
This however, does absolutely nothing to prove the Church's infallibility false.
There have always been evildoers in the Church, ever since Judas.
There have always been divisions in the Church - read the Epistles of St. Paul, and Acts.
There is nothing new here.
The Church is made of sinners, human beings with free will. God does not take away the free will of every one baptized into the Catholic Church and make them mind-controlled zombies who cannot err or sin.

And you are confusing issues of liturgy and discipline, which can change (otherwise we'd all be hearing Mass at a table in an upper room in Aramaic), with issues of Faith and Morals, which cannot. And the Church makes room for different litugical practices (note the many different rites).

Believe me, I feel your frustration about slowness in disciplining certain errant clerics. Sometimes the Church acts slower than we'd like, and Church officials were never granted infallibility in disciplinary and administrative decisions. Sometimes they act too leniently, sometimes too harshly. That is for the Lord to judge, not us.

On the issue of sinners in the Church, I urge you to read and ponder the Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13:24-31)
[quote]He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?' He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' So the servants said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?' But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"[/quote]

(And for a protestant to condemn the Catholic Faith for "lack of unity" is just ridiculous. Look at the literally thousands of different prot sects which disagree with one another on nearly every possible theological issue.)

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='jasJis' post='973342' date='May 6 2006, 08:13 AM']
In another thread, a prot 'jesuspaidtheprice' brought up a point that wasn't seriously debunked, debated, or discussed.

What about the divided Catholic Church?

Look at the animosity between "Trads" and "Libs" whithin the Church.

What about the animosity about holding hands during the Our Father? It's not like the congregation are disobeying the priest in all these parishes.

What about the "disapproval" of many Caths regarding recieving in the hand instead of on the tongue?

Why are there so many nuns with "wacky" ideas for liturgies and stuff?

Why has the American Church bishops strayed so far from what Trad Caths claim is correct teaching?

How can a bishop get married by Rev. Moon?

How can priests engage in active homosexuality and remain priests?

How can Bishops promote condoms if condoms are so wrong?

How can their be such questions about the various translations of the Bible that are approved by the Church but some be called 'heretical' by learned and faithful Catholics?

Why the ambiguity of the Grace of Infallibiltiy in actual application. Is it this Papal decree, or that one, or this one here, the Beatificaiont of Simon, the deomtion of Simon, woman Can't be priest infallible or not?

Why does it seem a Catholic has to be a degreed theologian, a certified canon lawyer, a registered mystic, an accredited philosopher, to even hope that their understanding is 'correct'?

Why is it that you couldn't get any 4 Catholics here at phatmass to all agree on an answer to a significant question?

I'm being dead serious here. I've been told plenty of times by people here that I have to come 'home' to the Church or I'm condemned to hell. (Turn or burn ) I've been told the Church is the Pillar of Truth.

What EXACTLY is the "TRUTH" I am to return to that I don't have where I am? The TRUTH that God loves me and I NEED His Mercy that is part of His Justice? I've got that. I am totally at His Mercy. Where am I finding additional "TRUTH" from the Catholic Church? From the priest who has LifeTeen kids on the Altar? From Bishop Lefebe? From the Bishop of LA? From Cardinal form the Boston area? From the videos of Bishop Sheen? From [u]which[/u] Pope Urban or Alexander or John Paul or Benedict?

[u]Inquiring souls want to know.[/u]
[/quote]
The computer ate my first answer, so I'll try again.
I have asked all those questions and probably many you didn't mention: the list can be endless.
Life is made up of messy, ornery, fallible, disputing, contentious people. So is the Church. As long as we have a fallen nature, we will stay this way. There will always be people who think their own private version is much better than what the Church states in its documents and traditions. Think of the parable with the weeds. Look at the carp Moses put up with, how the Apostles behaved, or the Corinthians St Paul contended with. Read the Old Testament! This is the way life is. There are saints, but they are few and far between. Most of us just muddle through as best we can.
I use the KISS method of theology: Keep it Simple Stupid. If the Church says something is done a certain way- then do it that way. I will obey the documents to the best of my ability. I don't control other people, so I don't have to account for their behavior, only mine. God doesn't ask for my opinion, He asks for my obedience. If I can't get something fixed that needs fixing, I do my best, pray about it and let it go. I used to get very upset about all the stuff in your questions, but my BP and prayer life suffered, and it certainly didn't make me a better person, and actually created a lack of charity.
So I question, try, pray, and obey and let God deal with the rest. Unless aided by grace, our fallen human nature will contaminate us until we reach our own personal end.

[dspen2005]

we can speak of a divided Catholic Church, b/c to be Catholic entails holding to certain dogmas and truths of the Faith. If you hold to ALL of them, you are Catholic. even rejecting one, separates one from the Church.... unlike Prots where we have Southern Baptists, American Baptists, independent Baptists, you can't simply pick and choose an interpretation and still be in the fullness of the Faith.

[Franimus]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='973551' date='May 6 2006, 11:06 AM']
Then you also seem to have concerns for what exactly the rules are. With this in mind, I too have beefs, of course I would being another ex-Catholic, because of that notion of the "ordinary magisterium". The set rules are in the Catechism and fall into the first paragraph here, and everything else is sorta just implied. Of course I don't like that because it can change. If infalibility is true, it's not so much that the infallible teaching changed, it's that something that was thought to be a teaching never really was. Sort of like thinking the earth was flat or something. Most Catholics will say you have to follow the implied beliefs anyway but I would imagine the best argument in favor of the CC for these implied beliefs is that you have to discern them for yourself.
[/quote]

The Church is only infallible in matters of faith and morals, keep that in mind. The Earth being flat is not and never was a matter of faith or morals, thus it was never an infallible teaching. IMO the Church has been slightly better nowadays at staying away from teaching about things unrelated to faith and morals (except for the one recent pope, I forget who it was, who said a bunch of stuff about the various forms of government, that's not binding at all)

The matter with the "hair-splitting" disciplines and rules, the Church has been guiding us on that since it's creation. Read the epistles, and you'll see St. Peter saying things like "Your adornment should not be an external one: braiding of the hair, dressing in fine clothes, or wearing gold jewelry..." but we need to keep in mind the spirit of the law. The old testament (specifically in the Torah) gave the Jews the letter of the law, but Jesus gave us the spirit of the law (I pretty sure that's written in the new testament somewhere). We're smart people. Well, usually. We're able to follow our consciences. To not follow our consciences, in any situation, is gravely wrong. To continue the previous verse I cited: "...but rather the hidden characteristics of the heart, expressed in the imperishable beauty of a calm and gentle disposition, which is precious in the eyes of God." (2 Peter 5:6 or thereabouts I think.. those numbers might each be off by one or two) Hence you'll notice the Church does not ban gold jewerly, fine clothes, and braids. It merely stresses that how you act is much more important than how you dress, and you should make sure your act is in order before your dress is.

[Sojourner]

Jas, when I first began exploring the Catholic Church I came up against a lot of these same questions. Before I began looking into it, I didn't know much about Catholicism, but I had the (grossy mistaken) notion that the church spoke and moved as a unified monolith. But just a millimeter beneath the surface and I found just as many disagreements and factions in the Catholic Church as you'll find in the Protestant world.

People don't see eye to eye on all sorts of things. You can list all the things we don't agree on as well as I can. But one thing I noticed in the Catholic church that helped reconcile some of these questions for me was the determination to keep the family together. In the world I grew up in, it was no big deal to leave a church when you disagreed with something. Heck, get enough people on your side, and you can start your own denomination. You'd rather sprinkle in baptism than dunk? Fine! We're off to start our own church!

Not that there aren't some of those same sentiments in places in the Catholic church, but more often than not I see a desire to stick it out. For better or worse, this is our family. We may not always agree with how it's going to be run, but that doesn't change the fact that we're family. As a Protestant, I could look at groups I didn't agree with and they were something "other" ... maybe still Christian, but I didn't have to identify with them. Now, the people I don't agree with -- I have no choice but to associate myself with them because they're family.

And what's the glue that keeps us coming back together? The Eucharist, first and foremost. We come together eat at a common table, all of us, no matter what questions or problems we may be working on. That communion, that common union, is the thread that binds us together, the DNA that makes us a family.

Being Catholic doesn't mean that I'm always going to be in complete agreement with everyone I worship with. It doesn't mean that I won't still have questions, that I won't struggle with how my faith is going to look practically lived out. It doesn't provide easy, black & white clear-cut answers to every question I have. But it does mean that I have a family -- blood relatives -- to help me with the questions and issues I'm dealing with. And every time I partake of the Body and Blood of Christ, I reaffirm my commitment to that family.

And that's a beautiful, beautiful thing.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='jasJis' date='May 6 2006, 08:13 AM' post='973342']
In another thread, a prot 'jesuspaidtheprice' brought up a point that wasn't seriously debunked, debated, or discussed.

What about the divided Catholic Church?
[u]Inquiring souls want to know.[/u]
[/quote]

The Catholic Church is not divided. There is one teaching of one faith. The Catechism is the Sacred Oral Tradition written down.


[quote]Look at the animosity between "Trads" and "Libs" whithin the Church.[/quote]

These are people with issues, both sides, these issues range from ignorance to pride and many others. Neither group makes up the organization, but they are part of the organization. Think of them as parts of the body, sometimes parts of the body get infections. The body also needs parts to help heal itself in the human body there are white blood cells... in the Church body there are good priests like Fr. John Corpari, Fr. Pacwa, Church Militant and Faithful laymen... The Pope.


[quote]What about the animosity about holding hands during the Our Father? It's not like the congregation are disobeying the priest in all these parishes.[/quote]

The Catholic Church teaches us, but the Catholic Church has to leave some learning up to us and requires us to continue to study the faith and grow deeper in it. Think of when your children were younger, and how there were little things that you did not want them to do but you have let them learn some things on their own or they will not learn. We are stubborn, some of us are ignorant. At least they are there in the Mass. It is better that they be at Mass than a place of error. This type things are no way a division of the Church... they are a sign that there needs to be knowledgeable Catholics that help their brethren learn the faith better.

[quote]What about the "disapproval" of many Caths regarding recieving in the hand instead of on the tongue?[/quote]

Many people do not show proper reverence to the Lord. This is not a division in the Church. You must realize that the word Church has multiple meanings... There is the Church as in Catholic Church one faith hierarchy organized and built by Christ: "Ecclesia", which is the Magisterium... then there is the Church as a whole including lay people... then there is the building... then there is the mystical body which is made up of everyone who thinks that they are serving God properly and in the Church (Ecclesia) built by Christ... The original term Church was Ecclesia... the teachings are not divided... people will always argue and disagree because of things like pride and envy... but the people in the Church disagreeing doesn't divide the Church teachings... the Church teachings are where our focus needs to be... We should pray for people when they do not follow them, we should try to correct them when we can or feel obligated to.


[quote]Why are there so many nuns with "wacky" ideas for liturgies and stuff?[/quote]

This is a prime example of why St. Paul said that a woman should not ever have authority over a man. They think differently and tend to be more emotional than logical. Most have huge hormonal changes monthly... think of how we men act on steroids (hormonal surges) by being more aggressive (I've never done steroids if some of you are wondering) because of hormones... most men don't have hormonal changes on a monthly occurrence, so men tend to be more stable. Steroids users are a good example because it makes men unstable, or any kid ages 12 to 23... testosterone levels are high, we do some pretty stupid things... Hormones affect women too... on a monthly basis. So it's understandable why some nuns may get wacky ideas.


[quote]Why has the American Church bishops strayed so far from what Trad Caths claim is correct teaching?[/quote]

Trads are members, not the Church teachings... Weeds and Wheat brother... read the gospels paying special attention to Christ's words about weeds and wheat... Take notes... group things... etc... read at least a chapter a day, they are short... It will help answer almost all of your questions.

[quote]How can a bishop get married by Rev. Moon?[/quote]

Again... answers are in Scripture... Those that go against Catholic Teachings are not causing the teachings to be divided... it just proves the words of Christ about ravenous wolves among us.


[quote]How can priests engage in active homosexuality and remain priests?[/quote]

How can a Catholic go against Catholic teachings and still be Catholic? We all sin... There are many things in this world are wrong. You can add to them or be an example and help make things right. You might never see the fruit of your labor, but there will always be fruit. You should be concerned with planting seeds and moving on. God will water and reap. Don't focus on the errors of men, focus on the teachings of the Church.

[quote]How can Bishops promote condoms if condoms are so wrong?[/quote]

Again, Bishops are not "Church Teachings", they are going against Church teachings by promoting them. It goes against common sense to blame the Church when someone in the Church goes against what the Church teaches. Bishops are not the Magisterium. The Magisterium is when the college of Bishops are acting with the Pope in teaching the faithful.

[quote]How can their be such questions about the various translations of the Bible that are approved by the Church but some be called 'heretical' by learned and faithful Catholics?[/quote]

Obviously they are not very learned Catholics. Many people get locked into what they first are taught... such as the people who claim to be life loving, good Catholics and remain in the democratic party because they've always been dem and their family has always been dem, etc... Some people are just ignorant and think they know when they don't know. Again, this is people in the Church who are wrong and going against Church teachings... if a Catholic goes against Church teachings it is illogical to blame the Church. The Church has taught them right and they choose to be and do wrong.


[quote]Why the ambiguity of the Grace of Infallibiltiy in actual application. Is it this Papal decree, or that one, or this one here, the Beatificaiont of Simon, the deomtion of Simon, woman Can't be priest infallible or not?[/quote]

I do not think it's so hidden in ambiguity... The problem is with ignorant Catholics arguing from emotion rather than knowledge through study. Something else to consider, if a teaching is not "infallible", we still need to follow it because of obediance. The Church is the Authority as Christ said it would be.

[b]891 [/b]
"The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful—who confirms his brethren in the faith—he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium," above all in an Ecumenical Council.418 When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed,"419 and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith."420 This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.421


Also read this page: "The Church, Mother and Teacher" [url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3art3.htm"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3art3.htm[/url]


[quote]Why does it seem a Catholic has to be a degreed theologian, a certified canon lawyer, a registered mystic, an accredited philosopher, to even hope that their understanding is 'correct'?[/quote]

I do not think it does. We have an obligation to study on our own. All the information is out there... We have to seek it. We need the prayers given to us, they teach us... we need the spiritual writings from the Saints... we need Scripture... we need the Catechism...

[quote]Why is it that you couldn't get any 4 Catholics here at phatmass to all agree on an answer to a significant question?[/quote]

I think that one could get four... There are some Catholics here who are not as knowledgeable as others. There are some Catholics here with different priorities, some with wrong priorities. We are just individuals. There are some here who think they know and haven't studied, there are some here who do know and have studied, and they give links to show it's not their opinion but Church teachings.

[quote]I'm being dead serious here. I've been told plenty of times by people here that I have to come 'home' to the Church or I'm condemned to hell. (Turn or burn ) I've been told the Church is the Pillar of Truth. [/quote]

Bro... Read the words of Christ and the Apostles in Scripture. Meditate on them. Never stop reading them... read them daily... they are healing. They will help you understand.


[quote]What EXACTLY is the "TRUTH" I am to return to that I don't have where I am? The TRUTH that God loves me and I NEED His Mercy that is part of His Justice? I've got that. I am totally at His Mercy. Where am I finding additional "TRUTH" from the Catholic Church? From the priest who has LifeTeen kids on the Altar? From Bishop Lefebe? From the Bishop of LA? From Cardinal form the Boston area? From the videos of Bishop Sheen? From [u]which[/u] Pope Urban or Alexander or John Paul or Benedict?[/quote]

The truth is in: The Catechism of the Catholic Church; The Scriptures; Encyclicals.... You must learn to recognize the difference between member of the Church, single priest or bishop, and the Church (Magisterium) as teacher.... The Magisterium is the Truth. I think you are confusing them.




I do not think that your main problem is the Church... your problem is our current society which allows so much error. Because of lazy Catholics too scared to preach the Truth and correct their brothers when in error, the error has grown to overwhelming proportions.

But there is just too much proof that the Catholic Church is correct to leave it. From the Gospels, to Fatima, to St. Pio, to the little miracles of an unexpected Eucharistic healing... so much proof... just so much proof. I cannot understand why anyone who did know know about the above things can turn their back on the Church... unless something was clouding their mind.


God Bless Bro,
ironmonk

someone please fix my quotes.

[Laudate_Dominum]

the only parish around during my conversion was radically liberal. I was kind of confused for a while about who to believe. I discerned that if I want to be Catholic I should seek to be of like mind with the fathers of the Church, the Saints and Doctors of the Church, the Pope, and those in union with the Pope. Since then it really hasn't been all that confusing. You might think I'm being over simplistic, but its my experience anyway. And you'll know true followers of Christ by their fruits. The saints bore fruit in their lives and were holy. They were loyal to the Pope. That's enough for me.
Oh, and check out how different saints acted who were around during things like the Great Western Schism, or during the pontificate of really sinful Popes.

Anyway, I g2g, but that's the main thing that helped me. Just looking to the saints. There are cool saints in Scripture too who went through confusing stuff but were faithful no matter what.. Not sure who your favourite saint is but I'm sure there is something in their life that has to do with this in some way and that might help.

Peace.

[dUSt]

jasJis,

I think your problem is that you are more aware and conscience of what the magisterium teaches than a lot of the religious in your area. You are caught up in this whole contradiction fiasco because you [b]know[/b] what Rome teaches, but find your lifestyle more compatible with something you may have been taught by your local church. Instead of allowing your conscience be formed by what you know in your heart to be true church teaching, you are looking for some type of loophole, and either consciously or unconsciously blaming your dilemna on this "contradicting" church.

This has been told to you a million times, but you must look to the pope, and allow your conscience to be formed by the universal magisterium--and not the flawed human church. You are in the common dilemna of knowing too much for your own good, so can no longer be morally "safe" due to a lack of knowledge.

Sure, you may be being more honest with yourself now, but why not be [b]really[/b] honest and develop a backbone to actually [b]do[/b] what you know to be right. You're the leader of your family, and [b]you[/b] are responsible for the spiritual well being of not only yourself, but also your wife and kids. Think of them.

You know you can't be 90% Catholic. You are faced with the decision to either get in or get out. If you get out, then I don't see how Christianity could even be an option for you, as you know as well as anyone that without the church, there is no Christianity.

Your next step should be to stop blaming the church for your inability to change your lifestyle to properly align with your conscience--a conscience, no doubt, more well formed to the truth than you wish it was.