Am I a Catholic?

[ATL_Granny]

***Hi and sincere thanks for sharing!

However I think you may have over looked a couple of points?

The Orginal OPQ was from a Baptized, CONFIRMED and First Communion former Catholic.Not simply a Baptized at birth, never practized the faith person.

Aso; I’m not sending anyone to Hell. I am making clear this person seems to have chosen positions that MIGHT [very likely] be leading them in that direction. And that they are personal positions that are greviously opposed to the Bible and the Teachings of th CC.

Never once did I share a personal opinion, rather I have shared Biblical evidence, and the official position of the CC on how a heritic is defined, and further what ones obligations are to seek and then accept the truth.

This person is posting on a CATHOLIC FORUM FOR A SPCIFIC PURPOSE: either to learn the truth or to flaunt there lifes choices. In both cases they deserve to be exposed to the truth, which is precisely what I have done.

Love and prayers for you both.

Pat

Perhaps Granny, you’ll pray for both of us? ***

**Heb. 6: 1-8 **…For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, [Catholic Holy Cmmunion] and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. In a most specific way this applies to fallen away Catholics] For land which has drunk the rain that often falls upon it, and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.”

Ar you aware Granny, that the second largest religious sec of christians in America is “fallen away Catholics?” Are we not to attempt to sahre God’s Word? God’s TRUTH?

PJM – Just because someone was baptized and confirmed doesn’t mean that they were PROPERLY CATECHIZED. We both know of people — on this very board even – who promulgate their own uneducated view of what the CC teaches.

I stand by every word I wrote in my last post. We have no way of knowing what impediments may stand in the way of full and total understanding of the Church’s teachings, which is a requirement in order to be in the state of “willful ignorance,” “obstinate denial” or just plain apostasy. The Church has repeatedly said that it is not our place to impute such a position on anyone.

You will be in my prayers.

 

[flyingfish]

what in this life will give you total satisfaction and fulfillment? Sexual pleasures, money, cars, big homes, a boat, recognition or fame? Briefly, sexual pleasures are short lived and not worth anything outside of a legitimate relationship with a commitment worthy of and in the state of marriage. Everything else will rot or rust away because it comes from man, not God. And no man ever finds complete fulfillment and satisfaction unless he has entered an intimate relationship with God. Human nature seeks until it finds and materialism never fulfills or completely satisfies. The question is, how well did you seek to learn who God is, who Jesus is? If you knew that, you wouldn’t be sacraficing your soul for this temporary lay-over.

As a conservative Catholic, my biggest worry would be that I would squander the only life I had by restricting many of the things that bring happiness for an afterlife that doesn’t exist.

Even when I was a conservative Catholic, I was more an obedient Catholic and a hopeful Catholic, but I always had very strong doubts about the truth of Christianity and even the existence of God. I always felt like I was trying to convince myself of something that most likely wasn’t true.

The tension is not there for me as a liberal, because I no longer feel like I have to make personal sacrifices in quality of life for an afterlife that may not be.

 

[ATL_Granny]

As a conservative Catholic, my biggest worry would be that I would squander the only life I had by restricting many of the things that bring happiness for an afterlife that doesn’t exist.

Even when I was a conservative Catholic, I was more an obedient Catholic and a hopeful Catholic, but I always had very strong doubts about the truth of Christianity and even the existence of God. I always felt like I was trying to convince myself of something that most likely wasn’t true.

The tension is not there for me as a liberal, because I no longer feel like I have to make personal sacrifices in quality of life for an afterlife that may not be.

It seems to me that your primary question really boils down to an intellectual tug-of-war. I believe you said earlier that you’ve read “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis. Have you read “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel? Written just a few years ago, the author was the legal editor for the Chicago Tribune (I believe) and his wife suddenly became a “Born-Again Christian.” It drove him nuts!

So, he set out to prove her wrong and amassed experts in the fields of history, anthropology, etc., in order to disprove the literal existence of Jesus as well as the premise of him being God. He quizzed expert after expert much like an attorney would during a court case.

He converted during the process. This book is an excellent resource for those who struggle with the intellectual question of whether Jesus existed.

 

[flyingfish]

It seems to me that your primary question really boils down to an intellectual tug-of-war. I believe you said earlier that you’ve read “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis. Have you read “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel? Written just a few years ago, the author was the legal editor for the Chicago Tribune (I believe) and his wife suddenly became a “Born-Again Christian.” It drove him nuts!

So, he set out to prove her wrong and amassed experts in the fields of history, anthropology, etc., in order to disprove the literal existence of Jesus as well as the premise of him being God. He quizzed expert after expert much like an attorney would during a court case.

He converted during the process. This book is an excellent resource for those who struggle with the intellectual question of whether Jesus existed.

I haven’t read that one in particular, most of what I read apologetics wise is probably from William Lane Craig and his philosophical arguments, some Peter Kreeft, and CS Lewis.

Unfortunately or fortunately depending on who you are, I also read a lot of stuff by secular biblical scholars (like Bart Ehrman and Robert Price) and a bunch of papers on the state of archaeological evidence for Old Testament events, independent confirmation of New Testament events and the like.

Being a Christian would require a lot of faith for me, because I don’t believe the evidence is there for me to think the events happened. I’ve never been very good at faith.

When I do pray, I pray to a deistic or pantheistic God.

 

[ATL_Granny]

I haven’t read that one in particular, most of what I read apologetics wise is probably from William Lane Craig and his philosophical arguments, some Peter Kreeft, and CS Lewis.

Unfortunately or fortunately depending on who you are, I also read a lot of stuff by secular biblical scholars (like Bart Ehrman and Robert Price) and a bunch of papers on the state of archaeological evidence for Old Testament events, independent confirmation of New Testament events and the like.

Being a Christian would require a lot of faith for me, because I don’t believe the evidence is there for me to think the events happened. I’ve never been very good at faith.

When I do pray, I pray to a deistic or pantheistic God.

Give “Case for Christ” a whirl. This man was honestly very much against his wife converting to Christianity and set about finding leaders in their fields to disprove her newfound beliefs. It’s very logical and cogent, not huggy-feely. I think it will appeal to your obvious need for intellectual honesty and a good challenge.

 

[twb1621]

.

As a conservative Catholic, my biggest worry would be that I would squander the only life I had by restricting many of the things that bring happiness for an afterlife that doesn’t exist.

Please understand my words to you are not meant to be insulting or hurtful but rather honest points raised for your thoughts.

Your response is well explained and very honest, thank you for your expression of feelings. If you will, consider those things that you refer to as bringing you happiness. Think about how long you find them fulfilling or satisfying before you begin to feel the need to re-act the activity or replace the object or increase the reward…. But in your answer, whether in posted response or to yourself, at what point do you believe you will have reached the ultimate goal of total satisfaction and fulfillment… or do you realize that will never happen?

On the other hand, do you really believe God intended to void you of fulfillment and total satisfaction in a relationship with Him? Or perhaps is it you have never succeeded in overcoming the fear of loosing out on something long enough to find out who He is and what He may truly mean to you? If you pursued seeking Him to a point of learning who He truly is as you would someone you found great interest and desire in getting to know, do you really think it would be a “one way” relationship?

Even when I was a conservative Catholic, I was more an obedient Catholic and a hopeful Catholic, but I always had very strong doubts about the truth of Christianity and even the existence of God. I always felt like I was trying to convince myself of something that most likely wasn’t true.

Trying to convince yourself there is a God or hoping to convince yourself there wasn’t? If it were, according to your fears, you would fear you would loose out on all the “pleasures” life may present you… Perhaps your doubts come from hoping all of it is false so you can experience as much pleasure as possible in this life; pleasure based on what your senses can experience, yet limited by those same senses: hearing, feeling, seeing, smelling, tasting… feeding pride.

The tension is not there for me as a liberal, because I no longer feel like I have to make personal sacrifices in quality of life for an afterlife that may not be.

The tension’s there… just suppressed but you know that. In a true relationship, that is a mutual loving relationship, sacrifices are evidence of a devotional love for one another and the deeper the love, the easier sacrifice becomes and the rewards are priceless. If you were to realize Jesus is the Son of God, how would you feel realizing someone desired to give you life, sincerely love you, and give you free will in the hope you would willingly choose to return that love rather than possibly deny Him of it? How would you feel realizing that He left a state of being completely safe and untouchable and opened Himself up to human vulnerability, and because He loved you so much, He accepted the most violent and perverted methods of torture, unimaginable suffering and agonizing death by twisted minds and human hands, in order to provide you the opportunity to obtain eternal life, yet with no commitment from you of your devotion to Him? Do you sincerely believe you made a worthy attempt to seek to know Him so far?

Just some thoughts for your consideration. If you need direction, “…ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.” It takes sincere desire to learn the Truth. Maybe even a guide.

 

[David_Treadman]

I don’t even know if Jesus was God, or if God exists at all. However, sometimes I still pray.

My question is, am I still a Catholic? My understanding is that the Church considers me Catholic for life.

To me if you don’t believe that God is spiritually good and that Jesus was his messenger to bring light to the shadow we call the world, then I would have to say maybe you aren’t a Christian. Through all my heresy, statements I’ve made in the distant and recent past; I still knew, when I felt like I had lost my way, that God was spiritually good even when I wasn’t. We can tell ourselves that we know better than God and his lessons are just myths or fables, but we as Christians will always stray back to the fold and know that our lives are in the Lord’s protection if we only believe and have faith.

We all hit rough patches where we want to shake the dust of this tragic world and turn away from the Creator; however, we end up using pride as our shield and foolish reason as our sword. I write this without the judgment of wanting to cast you off to the liberal constructs that you have found yourself in, rather, I would just like you to listen: I hear your troubles, have been there too, but keep your heart open to change and never stop thinking and learning. Above all, never shut the door to the Creator’s love he has endowed in all of us.

 

[PJM]

=flyingfish;6244128]As a conservative Catholic, my biggest worry would be that I would squander the only life I had by restricting many of the things that bring happiness for an afterlife that doesn’t exist.

Even when I was a conservative Catholic, I was more an obedient Catholic and a hopeful Catholic, but I always had very strong doubts about the truth of Christianity and even the existence of God. I always felt like I was trying to convince myself of something that most likely wasn’t true.

The tension is not there for me as a liberal, because I no longer feel like I have to make personal sacrifices in quality of life for an afterlife that may not be.

*** My dear friend in Christ,

I’ll share a rare personal opinion.

It seems to me that in denying an “after life” is effectively denying God Himself.

The “First cause” has never been explained outside the very real possibility of a Superior Being, which we choose to call our God.

Because the Universe is Good, and because people are essentially Good [which we can know because we have the ability to decide to “love,” we can safely assume that this 'God is Good.

Further, logic leads us to ask the questions of the Origin of humanity and the precise purpose of humanity. [Humanity is far to complex to think there was no single precise reason for our existence. I have read that the average human person consist of some “10,000 MILLION individual cells; and that a single atom is as complex as a human person.”] That seems sufficient grounds for my premise.

Logic supports the following:

Something can only be what something is
Something cannot be what something is not
Something can only share what it has
Something cannot share what something does not have

AGREE?

All of humanity possess a mind, an intellect and a freewill, all of which can be demonstrated. AGREE?

The fact that you are able to comprehend the above and choose to respond or not respond is itself evidence of these THINGS.

So, quantify for me your “freewill”; what is its shape, color, size, weight?

You can’t because each of these THINGS is a SPIRITUAL THING, and as indicated above must come from another “Spiritual Thing.” [We call our God.] They cannot be inherited from our parents like our brain or our heart, which are Physical things.***

Thse are facts. So why then is humanity gifted with these same [but no tow being identical throughout all of history] gifts?

The answer is that this Creator God Created out of nothing the entire Universe; but not thing in the Universe could acknowledge “Him,” thank “Him,” or love “Him.” And that friend is the precise reason God Created Humanity. [Isaiah 43: 7, 21, Rom. 14: 11, 15:11.]

So if this is in fact the singular purpose of our Creation; an because [not if] humanity can freely choose to do or NOT TO DO what we are Created for; God has a system of punishment or reward. Simple Justice and fairness.

Good for Good. Heaven if we say yes.

Evil for Evil [bad] Hell if we decide to say no!

Nothing else even comes close to these very logical facts friend.

You can deny it; I don’t think you can refute it?

THINK ABOUT IT!

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[twb1621]

Not a response to anyone specifically;

If one wants to find definitive proof of the existence of God, look over your past life. There is a definite path in each of our lives, one is guided by God and the other we separate from God and go our own way. God does not turn His back on us, but we can choose to turn our back on Him. In going over one’s past life experiences, a person will know which path they chose. There is a difference between being in or rescued from a crisis or falling to a crisis and being guided through one.

The differences are obvious for those who become conscious toward them. Review your individual life and the events that were notably a part of it, both positive and sorrowful and what events followed. See what you come up with. And if you think God is not our guide and provider, it is because you have not turned back to Him. That is not to say some things we experience are not to serve a purpose in the service to God. And if you think He does not respond to prayer, try stopping, and looking, and listening to all that is around you. Its not fiction… It’s looking through the cloud of self indulgences many of us live in to finally see we chose the struggles and often the hardships we live. Remember that God gives us free will to love Him or to live by our own choices. He gave the same free will to the person next to you or in the next town from you. This means that one who chooses to sin against you is free to choose this yet often we blame God for our sorrows instead of the evil one. His is the justice for the sinner and His is the compassion for the suffered or the victims by the hands of another.

Did you ever have what you considered to be a sorrowful event in your life that you questioned “why” but that actually may have served to protect you or another loved one or guide you from something that could have been even more catastrophic? You wouldn’t know without consciously looking. Just an example of guidance that one would not normally realize….

 

[Major_Tom]

---

Good for Good. Heaven if we say yes.

Evil for Evil [bad] Hell if we decide to say no!

Nothing else even comes close to these very logical facts friend.

---

To flyingfish: good luck in your struggle. It sounds very similar to the one that I’ve gone through (brought up Catholic, baptized, confirmed, married in the Church). I will not counsel you to leave the Church, nor re-join the Church. I don’t think it’s my place. I was told that good listeners are supposed to listen, repeat back what the speaker says, offer few opinions… and the speaker will usually answer their own questions.

As non-catholics are in the minority here, though, I will try and offer a thought from the “opposition” to try and keep the conversation dynamic.

I think the dualistic choice painted by PJM does not work for me, and may not work for you.

When I ponder a God that it going to punish me, (by sending my immortal soul to hell ), because I have trouble understanding and living with policies that I have to obey, but do not understand (though I’ve tried)… well, that hasn’t led me any closer to God. This strikes me a negative, dour attempt at cowing people into submission. Would you, as a parent, treat your own child this way, with a black-or-white decision, with immortal consequences?

I also want to caution against peer pressure. If you have doubts, I think that you should explore them, as opposed to thinking “Yikes! Immortal soul in hell? I better believe…” and fool yourself into thinking that you’re “on the team”. I don’t think that you (nor God, nor the people next to you in your pew) will be any richer for this experience if you force it.

Instead of turning away from God entirely, I still actively seek him, and read on a variety of topics to try and get closer to him. Who knows, this path may lead me back to the Church one day. If so, I’ll be stronger for it. If not, I’ll be stronger for it. Good luck to you…!

 

[Major_Tom]

Liberalism is such a horrible and destructive cancer and it ruins everything it touches and influences…

Wow! You paint with a broad brush! I’m curious… will you be cashing your Social Security checks when you retire? It seems to me that ‘liberalism’ helped push our society to implementing it… or would cashing them “ruin everything (you) that it touches”…

 

[flyingfish]

*** My dear friend in Christ,

I’ll share a rare personal opinion.

It seems to me that in denying an “after life” is effectively denying God Himself. ***

Why do you think so? I actually lean toward believing that if there is a God, it’s still very unlikely that there is an afterlife. Why do you think God would necessarily have to provide us with an afterlife? I think an afterlife is very unlikely because there is strong evidence that everything that we are is what our brain does. Our memories, our personalities, our intellect are brain processes. I find it hard to believe that any of that can survive brain death.

Because the Universe is Good, and because people are essentially Good [which we can know because we have the ability to decide to “love,” we can safely assume that this 'God is Good.

[/QUOTE]

 

[flyingfish]

Would you, as a parent, treat your own child this way, with a black-or-white decision, with immortal consequences?

I wouldn’t, and I doubt most of us would. But isn’t the Church pretty clear that the Catholic concept of hell is a very painful place where you spend an eternity. Even if the pain is because God withdraws himself, it’s still supposedly horrible, and it still lasts forever.

Can CS Lewis’ hell be fit into Catholic theology?

 

[Holly3278]

The Catholic Church considers you to be Catholic for life.

 

[ATL_Granny]

I just don’t know.

The only thing that keeps me (hoping?) that there is a personal creator, is that we do have evidence that parts of the universe are conscious in ourselves. So even if this universe is all that there is, it has elements of consciousness in us and possibly others we don’t know of.

FlyingFish ~ So long as you have hope…

I’m a Realtor. One thing I see in almost every Buyer client is their unconscious reaction to a home. If, as we drive up they are unimpressed with the neighborhood or the house itself, any little thing that is wrong will have them reject the house outright. Yet, if they like the neighborhood and the house from the curb, they are willing to overlook many flaws. They are never aware of this, but when I point it out to them, inevitably they nod in agreement. They have made their mind up before they ever get out of the car.

I fear it’s the same general thing here. For whatever reason you have collectively given God the heave-ho. There is little that can be said to convince you because you have convinced yourself that, through intellectual pursuits, you have already figured out that there is no personal God. Short of God appearing in front of you, I suspect that you will spend a lot of time finding reasons to reject just about any argument that comes your way.

I’ve already recommended “Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel. Again, he was a skeptic of the highest order and set out to put forth a “court case” where he could convince his wife of the folly of her ways. I’ll throw out another one. “Ninety Minutes In Heaven” by Don Piper. Don was driving home from a pastor’s retreat when an 18-wheeler ran over his little Ford. Nine of those wheels ran over him at 60 mph. Pronounced dead at the scene by multiple EMT’s, his story is about what he saw in heaven before he miraculously awoke 90minutes later. I say “miraculously” because there is no earthly explanation for why a man who had a severed leg and severed arm who was left unattended for an hour and a half could live unless it was a miracle. If nothing else, he should have bled to death! (I met Don Piper last year. I just had to see if this guy could really walk without a limp! Sick, eh?)

I offer these books as a way for you to nurture that seed of faith you once had. Neither of them are written by Catholics, but each has a compelling story to tell of a God who is fully alive and wants a relationship with us.

I hope you find that a little seed of hope will lead you back to faith. And then faith will lead you back into the arms of your loving Father. He’s there. He does care.

 

[estesbob]

I wouldn’t, and I doubt most of us would. But isn’t the Church pretty clear that the Catholic concept of hell is a very painful place where you spend an eternity. Even if the pain is because God withdraws himself, it’s still supposedly horrible, and it still lasts forever.

Can CS Lewis’ hell be fit into Catholic theology?

[1035](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1035.htm’) The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

[1037](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1037.htm’) God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:

scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm#1035

 

[Major_Tom]

[God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:

](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1035.htm’)

Here’s the rub. I’m guessing that, by ‘turning away from God’, the Church means ‘turning away from the Church’. I submit that one can still make genuine attempts at seeking God, without, or in addition to, the Church.

 

[crazzeto]

Here’s the rub. I’m guessing that, by ‘turning away from God’, the Church means ‘turning away from the Church’. I submit that one can still make genuine attempts at seeking God, without, or in addition to, the Church.

How do you build a valid theological argument to support this position though? After all, St. Paul writes:

drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=61&ch=3&l=15&f=s#x

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The church is in fact, the upholder and defender of the faith. This would suggest anyone attempting to do as you suggest, is exposed and in danger. Better to seek God through the very pillar and ground of the truth in my estimation.

 

[estesbob]

Here’s the rub. I’m guessing that, by ‘turning away from God’, the Church means ‘turning away from the Church’. I submit that one can still make genuine attempts at seeking God, without, or in addition to, the Church.

You can not seperate Chirst from his Church-they are one in the same. You can turn away ffrom one without turning away from the other.

Pardon my ignorance and this is a serious question. Do unitarians believe Jesus is both God and the Son of God?

 

[SugarMagnolia]

Hello Flying Fish,

I have several times resisted writing more personal responses to your OP. I can relate to a lot of what you say. But I’ve finally decided to say something more substantial.

I feel that you and I are at about the same point on the road, except that we’re going in different directions, you away from the faith of your youth and me toward it. For that reason, I think I have a unique perspective to share, for I am coming away from the place you’re going to.

Let’s put political perspectives aside for now. I’ve noticed a lot of liberal-bashing on these boards and people who say if you’re liberal you can’t be Catholic. That’s nonsense. Catholicism is a religion not a political party. People who start sentences with the phrase “You can’t be both Catholic and ________” (fill in the blank with whatever the speaker is against) are simply trying to bully others into accepting their ideas. **Major Tom **makes an excellent and succinct point in post #51 on this subject.

If you are seeking religious arguments that will convince you of the theological dogmas you doubt, I do not think you will find anything that satifies you. I’ve also read Mere Christianity and found it to be beautifully written but logically unsound. I basically stopped believing in the supernatural altogether in my adolescence. There was quite simply no reason to believe in any of it. Recently, in midlife, I have felt myself drawn back to the Church. I started reading religious books, including C. S. Lewis. I was looking for what you’re looking for: a logical argument that would convince me that the supernatural exists. Let me tell you, such an argument does not exist. On the contrary, the more you search the further you will get from belief. The only way these arguments will convince you is if you already believe. I think **ALT Granny **makes an excellent analogy to this in post #55.

I’ll tell you what brought me back, not fully back yet, but back enough to call myself a Catholic rather than an atheist. The answer is emotion. Reason kept me away, but emotion is bringing me back. I started paying attention to the aspects of my childhood religion that were emotionally meaningful and satisfying to me. I started paying attention to the effect my devotions had in my life. Here again I must say ALT Granny’s analogy is spot on. Once I pursued the devotions that felt good and right and true to me, I found myself growing increasingly able to set aside the objections of my reason.

As far as reading material, I stay away from books that offer arguments, whether it’s St. Anselm or C. S. Lewis (though imaginative books like The Great Divorce I do find helpful). I prefer more devotional reading, like the lives of my favorite saints. Whether this is right for you I don’t know. I offer this simply as ‘where I’m coming from.’