A question for some Protestants who feel it is necessary to proselytize Catholics

[Dokimas]

I don’t think he meant that. The real problem is that if one gets all that knowledge and assents to its truth and then refuses to become Catholic, persisting in that willful obstinacy to death…one would put one’s own soul in dire jeopardy.

So…say I understand some article, tenant, belief you hold to be true, but DO NOT AGREE with said belief, there’s no harm to your soul, right?
Or mine…well, I suppose if I didn’t believe that my soul would be harmed, it would be a moot point…

But…if I say, oh, yeah, I agree with this belief, sounds great to me, and walk away with this knowledge and not make an effort to put this belief into practice, I am placing your soul in peril? Or is it MY soul that is in peril?
Or both?
I’m gathering it would be mine…

You know…forever ago, I did start to go through religious instruction. I was a freshman in college. I got no father than the idea of the trinity and transubstantiation. I could not reconcile myself to swallow that belief…sorry.
SO, needless to say, that was the end of MY religious instruction. The nun was very kind about it all, though. I really felt so bad that I just couldn’t swallow the idea…

Anyway. I am gathering I am NOT OT here, unlike I was on another thread, so I stopped discussing this…I kind of felt bad that I couldn’t ask more questions on the other thread, but I was pulling the thread way OT
The poster really opened my eyes a bit to some basic tenants, but…I still can’t reconcile myself to believe them…makes no sense to me, it just does not…

I would agree that transubstantiantion is a tough one and I don’t hold to it mayself.

The Trinity is not so hard, IMO.

One way to illustrate the Trinity is to take a look at the average male: he’s a son, a friend and could be a father. Three different ways of responding within those relationships.

A better illustration, again IMO, goes along with Genesis 1:26, being in God’s image… We are triune beings: we have a body, a soul and a spirit. (I’m sure you can see we are at least dicotomous: body and soul.)

 

[wanner47]

The following is taken from: catholic.com/library/Celibacy_and_the_Priesthood.asp

“The Church simply elects candidates for the priesthood (or, in the Eastern rites, for the episcopacy) from among those who voluntarily renounce marriage.”

A rose by any other name is still a rose. The CC choose not to allow men to be priest and to marry and stay priest. It just happened in FL (I believe it was there).

Dokimas –

Voluntarily renouncing marriage is not the same as forbidding marriage.

If the CC forced men to be priests, that’d be a different story. But becoming a priest is voluntary. Celibacy, for Latin Rite priests, is part of the vocation, something they voluntarily embrace as part of the priesthood.

A married man from another denomination who converts to Catholicism and wishes to be a priest does not have to give up his wife and/or children to do so, thanks to the Pastoral Provision. Not all converts receive this provision, but some do.

Also, as has already been said, Eastern Catholic Churches – which are in full communion with Rome – have married priests.

I don’t see why this concept is so hard to grasp. It’s like saying that hospitals are forcing medical school on doctors, when in fact doctors know well in advance that they have to go to medical school if they want to work in a hospital and choose to do so.

 

[phoenixrrt62]

Yes I do.

What’s a nook?

Oh, sorry. A nook is an e-reader. Barnes and Noble sells it. The direct competition is the Amazon Kindle, and well, now the I Pad
Thanks for the recommendation! When I finish with the book I am reading now, I will read Mere Christianity.

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas –

Voluntarily renouncing marriage is not the same as forbidding marriage.

If the CC forced men to be priests, that’d be a different story. But becoming a priest is voluntary. Celibacy, for Latin Rite priests, is part of the vocation, something they voluntarily embrace as part of the priesthood.

A married man from another denomination who converts to Catholicism and wishes to be a priest does not have to give up his wife and/or children to do so, thanks to the Pastoral Provision. Not all converts receive this provision, but some do.

Also, as has already been said, Eastern Catholic Churches – which are in full communion with Rome – have married priests.

I don’t see why this concept is so hard to grasp. It’s like saying that hospitals are forcing medical school on doctors, when in fact doctors know well in advance that they have to go to medical school if they want to work in a hospital and choose to do so.

If a man chooses marriage they can’t be a priest. The quote says the church only chooses those who choose celebacy. That’s a fancy way of saying they forbid priests that want to remain priests from marriage. Let me remind you of the priest in FL.

I agree, this concept is not hard to understand – a rose by anyother name is still a rose.

 

[Dokimas]

Oh, sorry. A nook is an e-reader. Barnes and Noble sells it. The direct competition is the Amazon Kindle, and well, now the I Pad
Thanks for the recommendation! When I finish with the book I am reading now, I will read Mere Christianity.

You’re welcome.

 

[wanner47]

If a man chooses marriage they can’t be a priest. The quote says the church only chooses those who choose celebacy. That’s a fancy way of saying they forbid priests that want to remain priests from marriage. Let me remind you of the priest in FL.

If a man wants to marry, all he has to do is not be a priest. It’s that simple. As to the priest in FL, I doubt his marriage will last. If he can’t keep his vows to the priesthood, he’s probably not going to be very good at keeping marriage vows, either.

 

[Dokimas]

If a man wants to marry, all he has to do is not be a priest

 

[phoenixrrt62]

I would agree that transubstantiantion is a tough one and I don’t hold to it mayself.

The Trinity is not so hard, IMO.

One way to illustrate the Trinity is to take a look at the average male: he’s a son, a friend and could be a father. Three different ways of responding within those relationships.

A better illustration, again IMO, goes along with Genesis 1:26, being in God’s image… We are triune beings: we have a body, a soul and a spirit. (I’m sure you can see we are at least dicotomous: body and soul.)

Ok. However I’d see soul and spirit as one and the same…

-and it still comes back to one person. A man. Like you and I. Jesus was a man, he had a message, a wonderful one, to be sure, and, sad to say, he died b/c of that message.
That’s all. Heartbreaking that he died trying to convey this message, but…he was a man.

He didn’t want to be god, nor did he become god, the politics of the day and centuries after made this belief become prevalent….that’s my belief.

This is what* I **have come to believe. *
Granted, this might infuriate you, and if so, I am sorry…but…I believed once with all my soul that Jesus was God’s son, or representative, but since have fallen away from that belief…perhaps it is I that is wrong…I don’t know…and yeah, it tortures me…

 

[guanophore]

I think Doki has erroneously confused the priesthood with church leadership.

I think you are talking about making the discipline "optional"here, not the gift. The gift is really not an “option” for the individual. If a person is called to it, yet refuses it, their life will be miserable, just as it is when one refuses other aspects of God’s calling upon their lives. It is no different for a person called to the sacrament of marriage. If they fail to live out the grace of that calling, they will be miserable. We are made for Him, and unless and until we walk according to His plan for our lives, we suffer the consequencs.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

A rose by any other name is still a rose.

That’s not very charitable of you and quite judgmental.

Just so I understand D, you think it is necessary to proselytize Catholics because of celibate preists? If not, what does it have to do with Protestants proselytizing Catholics?

God bless

 

[guanophore]

Giving credit to the CC that belongs to the Holy Spirit.

This statement reflects a deficient concept of “church”. You see, the Church is incarnational, just like Jesus. It has a human element, and a Divine element. It is preserved from error by the Divine element, not the human. The Church can do nothing without God, as he is the vine, and she is the branch. Unless she is connected to the root, she has no life in her. The model is demonstrated in the book of Acts, where it is written “it seemed right to the HS and to us”. It is a cooperative expereince. The HS used the Catholic Church to write, preserve, promulgate and canonize the Scripture. It is not “bragging”. It is simply a statement of fact.

A rose by any other name is still a rose. I don’t see anything in the NT that states that it is okay to examine the reason or circumstance for a marriage and then if it doesn’t match up, call it as if it did not exist.

Well, I think that is grist for another thread, don’t you? Or do you think Catholics need to be evangelized because we believe some people enter into relationships that cannot be validly construed as a marriage? The fruit that is produced by such a relationship is evidence that it is not rooted in grace.

Actually this is a tricky way around what Jesus and Paul said on the issue.

I think you lost me there. You think it is “tricky” for a person to embrace the gift God gave them?

Then they have changed what Paul said. I’ve resently been accused of adding to the Bible. Ouch.

Who is "they? what did “they” change?

We all “add” to the bible when we read it, because we are adding our own perceptions and expereince to the process of incorporating God’s word into ourselves. Many of our separated brethren believe that their perceptions and experienes are also part of the “word of God”, which is not the case. For example, I read a footnote in my Protestant bible today that is just plain not accurate. I am sure the people that wrote it believe what they wrote is the truth.

I’m only confused if I misunderstood what someone said several or many posts back that cause me to respond.

Yes, I finally read one of your posts that made this clear, though I still lack clarity about which one? When I catch up, perphaps I will find it?

Or maybe you don't understand that for the CC to tell their young seminarians that they must remain celebate to be a priest is mandating it.

No, I do not understand it this way at all. The Latin Rite chooses for priests from among those called to celibacy. It is not possible for the church to “mandate” celibacy. If a person does not receive this gift, then it means they are not called to be a priest of the Latin Rite.

**

They obviously make mistakes with their choices. They limit their choices. Too bad.

I agree that people make mistakes with their choices. for some the clarity takes many years, and they may proceed believing they were given a give of celibacy and later learn that it is not the case. The Church is accustomed to this.

I don’t think it is “too bad” to have parameters. Paul said that he counted all his worldly benefits as “dung” for the surpassing glory that was to be revealed in heaven. Would you say this is “limiting his choices”? I suppose it is, from a certain point of view. Paul did not see the “choice” of living a life of debauchery and sin as a valid choice for himself. He limited himself to what he as a Pharisee understood to be “godly” lifestyle. He did not sleep around with women (or boys), did not get drunk with new wine, did not spend his time recreating and pleasuring himself. He limited his choices to that which would serve God and advance the gospel, while giving “no opportuntiy to the devil”. If yousee this kind of lifestyle as “too bad they limit their choices”, then I submit that you have a deficient understanding of what the Christian life is all about. From your posts, I don’t think that is the case, so I have to wonder, why are you creating a different standard for Catholic Seminarians than you do for yourself?

A rose by any other name is a rose.

well, Catholics believe it is the sweet scent of God’s annointing when a person becomes a eunuch for the sake of the Kingdom. These persons are highly prized and needed, because we are deeply deficient in persons who are willing to set aside all wordly pursuites to give themselves fully to His work.**

 

[guanophore]

I never said that marriage is a requirement to serve.  I think I have a pretty good handle on Paul's teaching.  He would have them not be married but did NOT forbid it.

Yes, I also figured this out from one of your later posts. We are in agreeement on this point.

The verse was part of the link given that was trying to show why the CC only chooses celebate men (with few exception). I responded to the claim. That’s all. Again, context.

Ok.

And those who He calls and knows will be family men.

Yes, the Church affirms that family men also have a powerful gift and ministry to the church. Some family men also become priest.

We’re going along pretty good and then you throw in this. You think I don’t understand.

You are right, I do not understand. We are on a thread about why Protestants feel it is necessary to proselytize Catholics. I keep trying to relate the content of your posts to the thread topic.

It is you that continues to make false understandings of what I say.

Sometimes it is difficult to communicate effectively on an internet forum. That is precisely why I keep trying to clarify what you mean by things. Definitely I haver misunderstood some of the things you say.

If you can’t understand me, how can I trust your understanding on anything?

I think you have made it clear that you do not trust my understanding on a number of things. This is not prohibitive for productive discussion. I dont’ expect you to trust Catholicism. It is clear that you do not, and to the extent that I embrace it, that will result in some loss of trust in me as well. However, I appreciate our dialogues, and I remain curious as to why you think Catholics need to be evangelized.

Any protestant or catholic or for that matter any other person, who don’t know Jesus needs to really know Him as Lord and Savior. It is our priviledge to share the Gospel of Jesus with them in hopes they truly call upon the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Yes, I agree. I will also agree that the vast majority of persons who claim to be “catholic” in the United States do nto really know Him as Lord and Saviour. If they did, then our country would be functioning very differently. I think some of the salt has lost it’s savor.

BTW, why would I think that about the CC when Paul teaches the value of celebacy?

Why would I think what?

 He also realizes the sex drive and DOES NOT disqualify marraige from church leadership.

Indeed not! Although there are a very few whose gift of celibacy also seems to result in a lack of sex drive, this is very rare. Most persons who make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom have a normal sex drive. Historically, the formation for priests has not taught them how to cope with this in living out their gift. I would say this is true for the managment of all sex drives in Catholics, called to celibacy or not. The rate of premarital sex and adultery among so called Catholics is just as high as in irreligious groups. Obviously, there is something lacking in the catechesis on chastity across the board.

It is not necessary to be a priest, brother, or nun to be involved in church leadership. Most leaders are married. In the US, parish councils are largely comprised of married persons who are pillars in the Church community.

 

[Dokimas]

Ok. However I’d see soul and spirit as one and the same…

-and it still comes back to one person. A man. Like you and I. Jesus was a man, he had a message, a wonderful one, to be sure, and, sad to say, he died b/c of that message.
That’s all. Heartbreaking that he died trying to convey this message, but…he was a man.

He didn’t want to be god, nor did he become god, the politics of the day and centuries after made this belief become prevalent….that’s my belief.

This is what* I ***have come to believe.
Granted, this might infuriate you, and if so, I am sorry…but…I believed once with all my soul that Jesus was God’s son, or representative, but since have fallen away from that belief…perhaps it is I that is wrong…I don’t know…and yeah, it tortures me…

God is One similarly but differently as we are one person. I shouldn’t bore you as I’m sure you are knowledgable of our rhetoric.​

Your belief about God is yours and does not nor should it bother (infuriate) me. It might sadden me or cause me to pray for you, but infuriate me - it better not or I should get over myself.

 

[wanner47]

A rose by any other name is still a rose.

Except when it’s a daisy.

That’s not very charitable of you and quite judgmental.

Not at all; simply an observation based on what I know of his character.

 

[Dokimas]

Just so I understand D, you think it is necessary to proselytize Catholics because of celibate preists? If not, what does it have to do with Protestants proselytizing Catholics?

God bless

I’ll leave you to read my posts and come to your own conclusion.

BTW, using your logic, you must be here to proselytizing catholics or why would you be posting here.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

I’ll leave you to read my posts and come to your own conclusion.

BTW, using your logic, you must be here to proselytizing catholics or why would you be posting here.

No D. Is this another example of you purposely distorting someone’s posts? I just want to be sure. My question had nothing to with with you being here in this thread but what celibacy has to do with prostylizing Catholics? Again, what does it have to do with the thread topic?

God bless

 

[phoenixrrt62]

God is One similarly but differently as we are one person. I shouldn’t bore you as I’m sure you are knowledgable of our rhetoric.​

Your belief about God is yours and does not nor should it bother (infuriate) me. It might sadden me or cause me to pray for you, but infuriate me - it better not or I should get over myself.

Well…I really do not want to offend. This is a religious forum after all, and I am a guest, so to speak

Thanks for your comments, they helped a lot.

I am always open to any and all knowledge…whatever helps me understand the creator and our universe and our place as humans here in this school on planet Earth

 

[Dokimas]

Yes, I also figured this out from one of your later posts. We are in agreeement on this point.

Ok.

Yes, the Church affirms that family men also have a powerful gift and ministry to the church. Some family men also become priest.

You are right, I do not understand. We are on a thread about why Protestants feel it is necessary to proselytize Catholics. I keep trying to relate the content of your posts to the thread topic.

Sometimes it is difficult to communicate effectively on an internet forum. That is precisely why I keep trying to clarify what you mean by things. Definitely I haver misunderstood some of the things you say.

I think you have made it clear that you do not trust my understanding on a number of things. This is not prohibitive for productive discussion. I dont’ expect you to trust Catholicism. It is clear that you do not, and to the extent that I embrace it, that will result in some loss of trust in me as well. However, I appreciate our dialogues, and I remain curious as to why you think Catholics need to be evangelized.

 

[Dokimas]

Well…I really do not want to offend. This is a religious forum after all, and I am a guest, so to speak

Thanks for your comments, they helped a lot.

I am always open to any and all knowledge…whatever helps me understand the creator and our universe and our place as humans here in this school on planet Earth

I like the following verse on the issue of Christians being offended by what other say or believe. The verse is from the KJV.

Psalm 119:165 ¶ Great peace have those who love Your law, And nothing causes them to stumble.

If I get offended it’s not your fault. If would because I placed my feelings above God’s peace, joy and presence.

 

[Dokimas]

No D. Is this another example of you purposely distorting someone’s posts? I just want to be sure. My question had nothing to with with you being here in this thread but what celibacy has to do with prostylizing Catholics? Again, what does it have to do with the thread topic?

God bless

Come on; it appears you’re not being honest with yourself. I have never said celibacy was an evagelizing issue so for you to ask means you were challenging why I was speaking on a thread about evangelizing catholics. Thus my response. I’m evangelizing catholics just as much a you are.