G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
LOL…no worries. I’m a sixth grade teacher. After being cooped up with 26 hormonal 11-year-olds and 18 of them boys, I have the reading comprehension of a gerbil! 
- Status
P
paddy22
Guest
I salute you for such a respectful attitude. It is too bad that more people don’t acknowledge the ‘all-or-nothing proposition’ like you do.No, I never was “missing” that statement. But just because the ontological and permanent bond is there doesn’t mean one can disregard Catholic teaching. Now I’m not saying YOU are doing that. I merely think your theological views, and I’m not insulting them, are very well-suited to the Episcopal Church and not to the Catholic. But I have heard people say that someone who believes in gay rights, women priests, abortion rights, intercommunion, stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, and all the other liberal stuff will always be a Catholic and should stick around. Me, personally, well, I have been at the Anglican Church because I don’t want to be a hypocrite. Despite agreeing with them on 8 out of 10 issues and having Catholicism in my blood in so many ways, Catholicism is an all-or-nothing proposition. If one can have a liberal opinion but be man enough to put his feelings aside and defer to the Holy Father/ Magisterium and agree to follow them and cooperate despite his/her personal feelings, then that’s different. But I have been divergent on several issues and have had too much respect, actually, for Catholicism to stay there taking communion when I’m not in full agreement and seriously have views that violate the unity of the Eucharist. The Anglican Church doesn’t view the Eucharist in terms of theological/doctrinal unity as much as a personal encounter with Christ in the Sacrament. Catholicism sees it as unitive with Christ Almighty but also a deep sign of unity with all other Catholics on the theology and truth that the Church teaches. So I’m a firm believer that unless one truly buys the product of Catholicism, an individual has no business being a Catholic. I’m at the point where I might very well return to Catholicism, tomorrow for all I know, seriously. I’m seriously considering it. But if I return, I’ll have to bury my divergent views and defer out of respect to the Chair of Peter. If I cannot, I’ll remain Anglican.
C
CMatt25
Guest
This discussion has veered off the OP’s original topic.
But if the Church wants it all or nothing, perhaps She should no longer contend in CCC that our Baptism with an indelible mark incorporates us into the Church unless She no longers wants to consider Herself the only true Church.
Or perhaps She should not contend things such as pt 7 here:
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html
God bless you along your lifelong journey of faith and peace.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Thanks, Paddy. If I do return to the CC, I will acquiesce to their dogma and on the issues with which I don’t agree, I’ll accept a higher authority than myself and swallow my pride. But at this point I don’t agree and respect the CC’s wishes. I don’t want to be a hypocrite.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Gurney, while I’m neither prepared to say if one follows their conscience on a matter they might disagree, it then automatically equates to pride…
Nor if “acquiesing” while one still disagrees equates to not then being a hypocrite… since one could argue the opposite, that when “acquiesing” in such a case, it is being hypocritical to the depths of one’s most secret core…
CCC1776 “Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.”
Good for you though Gurney as it appears you strive to follow your conscience on your walk. As is stated in CCC 1790 “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself.”
I believe if you stay true to your conscience and within your heart continue to stay on fire for Christ, you will neither be lukewarm for Him nor a hypocrite. The same TEC priest I have alluded to previously in this thread once gave me this, I believe, sound piece of advice:
“If we open our hearts to God’s spirit, we will know in what way God is calling us, and when and if the time is right, the Holy Spirit will let us know.”
God bless you on your walk with Him whether you remain where you are, return to full practice, or in whatever decision your conscience guides.
Peace my friend and Christmas blessings to you and yours.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
These things are complicated, no doubt. I think if a person is willing to submit to the magisterial teachings and agrees to follow despite personal feelings, it’s not hypocrisy but loyal submission and humility. I am just not ready to do that yet I guess. Maybe I never will. But I think if, as a Catholic, I get on here (CAF) and tell everyone how lame indulgences are and try to talk people into thinking my way, knowing full well the Church teaches indulgences are morally and theologically sound and fruitful, I’m being a hypocrite. That’s all. I’m certainly not calling you a hypocrite. I just don’t want to be one. And with the history of the Church and moments like Honorius I, I’m not sure I can argue the pope’s infallible?
May God bless you too, my friend, wherever you may end up, which I think you’ll stay a good Catholic. I might end up meeting you there. I could end up there tomorrow for all I know. I’ve felt a magnetic pull and today my wife and I had a heart to heart about all this. She feels so bad about my spiritual torment that when I told her a few private things about how I’ve felt lately, she cried. It’s hard.
May the blessings of Christmas be on you and yours!!
May God bless you too, my friend, wherever you may end up, which I think you’ll stay a good Catholic. I might end up meeting you there. I could end up there tomorrow for all I know. I’ve felt a magnetic pull and today my wife and I had a heart to heart about all this. She feels so bad about my spiritual torment that when I told her a few private things about how I’ve felt lately, she cried. It’s hard.
May the blessings of Christmas be on you and yours!!
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Yes you are correct. I knew it was something that can be used instead of wine. Thanks.
C
CMatt25
Guest
No doubt Gurney. And neither did I mean to infer you in some way would be a hypocrite for following your conscience including whether such conscience leads you to complete submission or not. If I did, I am sorry.These things are complicated, no doubt. I think if a person is willing to submit to the magisterial teachings and agrees to follow despite personal feelings, it’s not hypocrisy but loyal submission and humility. I am just not ready to do that yet I guess. Maybe I never will. But I think if, as a Catholic, I get on here (CAF) and tell everyone how lame indulgences are and try to talk people into thinking my way, knowing full well the Church teaches indulgences are morally and theologically sound and fruitful, I’m being a hypocrite. That’s all. I’m certainly not calling you a hypocrite. I just don’t want to be one. And with the history of the Church and moments like Honorius I, I’m not sure I can argue the pope’s infallible?
May God bless you too, my friend, wherever you may end up, which I think you’ll stay a good Catholic. I might end up meeting you there. I could end up there tomorrow for all I know. I’ve felt a magnetic pull and today my wife and I had a heart to heart about all this. She feels so bad about my spiritual torment that when I told her a few private things about how I’ve felt lately, she cried. It’s hard.
May the blessings of Christmas be on you and yours!!
But indeed Gurney none of us know where God might lead us tomorrow. Remember my brother as I know you do, that regardless of the torment any one of us faces, it pales in comparison to that which Christ, our Lord and Savior bore for us. To me it’s sorta like this my friend. The Giants could win a pennant and the Padres the next. Or the Giants could repeat. But the fans of each? Californians, Gurney. And those of us whose teams never win a Series in our lifetimes? All still united in communion with that heavenly sport known to man as what else but, baseball.
Peace.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
I’m just glad you didn’t put the Giants in the same category as the Dodgers. Truly the Giants are holy and the Dodgers fundamentally evil. They are beyond salvation, sadly 
Their fans commit a mortal sin by going to Chavez Ravine and pulling for them eating Dodgerdogs. It’s intrinsically evil Going to AT&T Park is an indulgence, plenary 
The Padres earned an indulgence giving up the NL West title to us this year so they’re ok for now 
Their fans commit a mortal sin by going to Chavez Ravine and pulling for them eating Dodgerdogs. It’s intrinsically evil Going to AT&T Park is an indulgence, plenary The Padres earned an indulgence giving up the NL West title to us this year so they’re ok for now No doubt Gurney. And neither did I mean to infer you in some way would be a hypocrite for following your conscience including whether such conscience leads you to complete submission or not. If I did, I am sorry.
But indeed Gurney none of us know where God might lead us tomorrow. Remember my brother as I know you do, that regardless of the torment any one of us faces, it pales in comparison to that which Christ, our Lord and Savior bore for us. To me it’s sorta like this my friend. The Giants could win a pennant and the Padres the next. Or the Giants could repeat. But the fans of each? Californians, Gurney. And those of us whose teams never win a Series in our lifetimes? All still united in communion with that heavenly sport known to man as what else but, baseball.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Hmmm. Well I could say only the big Padre in the sky knows a Dodger’s heart. I have no fish to fry in either case. I did have a Dodgerdog though once in Spring training. But never fear Gurney. I didn’t go all crazy in Dodger blue. Had my team’s gear on.I’m just glad you didn’t put the Giants in the same category as the Dodgers. Truly the Giants are holy and the Dodgers fundamentally evil. They are beyond salvation, sadly
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
My son sees a Dodgers fan, five years old, and yells “daddy, there are the bad guys!” He’s a well-trained, wise young lad We don’t say the “d” word in our home It’s orange and black all the way baby! In the AL I’ll pull for the Sox. I’ve liked 'em since I was a kid. But if they play SF, I’m giants all the way!
We don’t say the “d” word in our home It’s orange and black all the way baby! In the AL I’ll pull for the Sox. I’ve liked 'em since I was a kid. But if they play SF, I’m giants all the way! Hmmm. Well I could say only the big Padre in the sky knows a Dodger’s heart. I have no fish to fry in either case. I did have a Dodgerdog though once in Spring training. But never fear Gurney. I didn’t go all crazy in Dodger blue. Had my team’s gear on.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Well in that case to get back to some semblance of the thread, don’t hold your breath Gurney, but the Anglican lad may get to commune at West Pt yet!My son sees a Dodgers fan, five years old, and yells “daddy, there are the bad guys!” He’s a well-trained, wise young lad
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Awwww come on now, dude! You’re the one that brought baseball into this! You know how I feel about muh Giants! You baited me, you knew full well!
Well in that case to get back to some semblance of the thread, don’t hold your breath Gurney, but the Anglican lad may get to commune at West Pt yet!
R
rr1213
Guest
When I was Episcopalian, I usually took communion by intinction. When my wife and I converted to the Catholic Church, we went through a sort of dress rehearsal ahead of time with the priest, other soon to be Catholics and our various sponsors. I asked if as Catholics we could take by intinction and received only puzzled looks and responses along the lines of “no, we don’t do that.” So, I simply smiled, turned to my wife, and said … “when in Rome…”
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Yeah…literally in Rome!
When I was Episcopalian, I usually took communion by intinction. When my wife and I converted to the Catholic Church, we went through a sort of dress rehearsal ahead of time with the priest, other soon to be Catholics and our various sponsors. I asked if as Catholics we could take by intinction and received only puzzled looks and responses along the lines of “no, we don’t do that.” So, I simply smiled, turned to my wife, and said … “when in Rome…”
B
Bluegoat
Guest
Unless someone was going to be guzzling the whole chalice, there is absolutely no reason for a pregnant woman not to take the blood. A sip of wine is not dangerous to a fetus. There is absolutely no evidence for anything like that. It’s the same crazy fanatics that say you can’t have a beer when you’re nursing a baby.
1
1ke
Guest
Intinction was common in the Episcopal church I grew up in also.When I was Episcopalian, I usually took communion by intinction. When my wife and I converted to the Catholic Church, we went through a sort of dress rehearsal ahead of time with the priest, other soon to be Catholics and our various sponsors. I asked if as Catholics we could take by intinction and received only puzzled looks and responses along the lines of “no, we don’t do that.” So, I simply smiled, turned to my wife, and said … “when in Rome…”
Intinction can be done in the Catholic Church, but it is not *usually *done. The chalice is the *norm *in the US.
Also, if receiving by intinction, only the priest can intinct. Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion cannot.
- Status