Are "Catholics" really Catholic, or mostly Scriptural illiterates?

[Mt_28_19_20]

Below are quotes from the beginning of the Catechism, and from the Catechism concerning Scripture. In relationship to these, my question is:

If a Catholic rarely mentions Jesus Christ as their savior so that others may know the only true God and reflect the gospel by their words and daily life, and rarely, if at all, mentions Scripture in sharing or defending their faith, then are they really living their faith? Are they really Catholic? And do they have any right question whether someone else is Catholic?

 I ask because several Catholics on this forum have questioned whether I am Catholic, since I disagree with required celibacy for priests, and am uncertain whether it is important to our faith if Mary is or is not a perpetual virgin. Then I realized, I don't recall any of those who have questioned my faith mentioning Jesus or referring to Sacred Scripture. Often seems more focused on the Church being perfect, whether Protestants can agree on anything, and how awful Luther was. Someone even characterized mentioning Scripture as throwing out a road block. Are many Catholics that uncomfortable with the Church's Sacred Scripture?

Michael

scborromeo.org/ccc/prologue.htm#I
PROLOGUE

"FATHER, . . . this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."1 "God our Savior desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."2 "There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved"3 - than the name of JESUS.
I. THE LIFE OF MAN - TO KNOW AND LOVE GOD

1 God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Savior. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

2 So that this call should resound throughout the world, Christ sent forth the apostles he had chosen, commissioning them to proclaim the gospel: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."4 Strengthened by this mission, the apostles "went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it."5

3 Those who with God’s help have welcomed Christ’s call and freely responded to it are urged on by love of Christ to proclaim the Good News everywhere in the world. This treasure, received from the apostles, has been faithfully guarded by their successors. All Christ’s faithful are called to hand it on from generation to generation, by professing the faith, by living it in fraternal sharing, and by celebrating it in liturgy and prayer.6

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c2a3.htm#113
V. SACRED SCRIPTURE IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH

131 "And such is the force and power of the Word of God that it can serve the Church as her support and vigor, and the children of the Church as strength for their faith, food for the soul, and a pure and lasting fount of spiritual life."109 Hence "access to Sacred Scripture ought to be open wide to the Christian faithful."110

132 "Therefore, the study of the sacred page should be the very soul of sacred theology. The ministry of the Word, too - pastoral preaching, catechetics and all forms of Christian instruction, among which the liturgical homily should hold pride of place - is healthily nourished and thrives in holiness through the Word of Scripture."111

133 The Church "forcefully and specifically exhorts all the Christian faithful. . . to learn the surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ, by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures. Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.112

 

[1ke]

If a Catholic rarely mentions Jesus Christ as their savior so that others may know the only true God and reflect the gospel by their words and daily life, and rarely, if at all, mentions Scripture in sharing or defending their faith, then are they really living their faith? Are they really Catholic?

The answer to these questions is yes. Words are only part of the equation. One is to also live by example.

It also seems to me you want to put some quantifable litmus test on people-- I mean who defines “rarely”? Why must one use Scripture specifically in defending one’s faith-- the Catholic Church does NOT believe in Sola Scriptura.

And do they have any right question whether someone else is Catholic?

Well, yes.

Although, I think you may be taking things overly personally and maybe seeing accusations that aren’t there. Such is the nature of the internet forum. These are anonymous people who don’t know you, so why do you care?

I ask because several Catholics on this forum have questioned whether I am Catholic, since I disagree with required celibacy for priests, and am uncertain whether it is important to our faith if Mary is or is not a perpetual virgin.

Well, since celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine I’m not sure why people would have a problem with you questioning that.

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity is a dogma, and dogmas are not open for questioning. But, you don’t seem to be questioning it’s veracity, just what bearing it has on our Faith. Again, I don’t see anything inherently wrong there.

Having not been a part of these threads, I cannot ascribe any motive to the posters or evaluate whether or not they were out of line with their comments.

Then I realized, I don’t recall any of those who have questioned my faith mentioning Jesus or referring to Sacred Scripture. Often seems more focused on the Church being perfect, whether Protestants can agree on anything, and how awful Luther was. Someone even characterized mentioning Scripture as throwing out a road block. Are many Catholics that uncomfortable with the Church’s Sacred Scripture?

It makes perfect sense that since YOU are a Catholic, other Catholics would feel free to argue from Church teaching and not Scripture alone especially on the two topics you mention… they aren’t explicit in Scripture and are primarily from Tradition.

Also, keep in mind that this is an internet forum geared towards **apologetics **and threads are very topic specific. In this forum, I mostly debate on the topic of NFP, contraception, abortion, etc. However, this topic rarely if ever comes up in my real life. So, if you only look at my “internet” personality you would have only a partial view of who I am and how I live my life, what I talk about, how much I read Scripture.

In short-- you are jumping to conclusions about people you don’t really know because you feel offended and are trying to justify yourself. I suggest you get a thicker skin if you are to endure on forums such at these.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Below are quotes from the beginning of the Catechism, and from the Catechism concerning Scripture. In relationship to these, my question is:

If a Catholic rarely mentions Jesus Christ as their savior so that others may know the only true God and reflect the gospel by their words and daily life, and rarely, if at all, mentions Scripture in sharing or defending their faith, then are they really living their faith? Are they really Catholic? And do they have any right question whether someone else is Catholic?

If Catholic rarely mention Jesus Christ as their savior, they are in contrary to the Teachings of the Catholic Church. Fr. Corapi said this, “If Jesus Christ is not the center of your catechesis, you are wrong!”

I ask because several Catholics on this forum have questioned whether I am Catholic, since I disagree with required celibacy for priests, and am uncertain whether it is important to our faith if Mary is or is not a perpetual virgin.

Celibacy is discipline which can change. However, celibacy is a gift. Jesus for one was celibate and so was Paul. The priest gives himself entirely to the Church just like what Jesus did when he dead for His Bride the Church.

People who do not agree with celibacy failed to realized it is a gift from God.

Then again, there are married men who are priest in the Catholic Church.

The Pertual Virgin of Mary has been a part of divine revelation. Whether you know it or not, it is connected to Jesus Christ. You have issue with this, you have a problem with the Church or Jesus Christ himself.

Then I realized, I don’t recall any of those who have questioned my faith mentioning Jesus or referring to Sacred Scripture. Often seems more focused on the Church being perfect, whether Protestants can agree on anything, and how awful Luther was. Someone even characterized mentioning Scripture as throwing out a road block. Are many Catholics that uncomfortable with the Church’s Sacred Scripture?

You sound very Protestant in your thinking for someone who is Catholic. The majority of the Catholic who do not know their faith probably are. But those Catholic who goes to Mass everyday probably love the Scripture.

The Catholics here in CAF love Scripture, Michael.,

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

The Catholics here in CAF love Scripture, Michael.,

Excellent! I’ll keep an eye out for it, perhaps it’s more evident and just hasn’t caught my attention. Actually thought there’d be a bit more of it in this thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=180005

“You sound very Protestant in your thinking for someone who is Catholic. The majority of the Catholic who do not know their faith probably are. But those Catholic who goes to Mass everyday probably love the Scripture.”
Why, because I quote the Catechism and the Church’s Sacred Scripture, disagree with a tradition, and am on the fence with one non-central teaching? Quoting Scripture is not equivalent to believing in the false notiong of sola Scriptura.

God bless,

Michael

 

[Al_Masetti]

One of my Catholic friends explained it this way: “Catholics learn their faith by osmosis.”

In other words, the Catholic culture precludes actually studying or learning religion in any sort of methodical sort of way. Instead, Catholics just sort of pick it up as they go along.

Naturally, they miss a lot. And they get a lot of it wrong.

In fact, Fr. Benedict Groeschel once publicly stated (at least the time I heard him) that the really big scandal of the Church is the lack of teaching of the Faith to the laity. The consequences are not only Scripural illiteracy but also ignorance of Church history, the lives of the saints, Church culture and doctrine, etc.

One of my priest-friends stood up on a Sunday and in his homily stated that the difference between the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible goes beyond the number of books and arguments about translation differences. The Protestant Bible has yellow stickies, has notes written in the margins and is dog-eared from having been studied. Whereas, the Catholic Bible is pristine, never having been opened.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

The answer to these questions is yes. Words are only part of the equation. One is to also live by example.

It also seems to me you want to put some quantifable litmus test on people-- I mean who defines “rarely”? Why must one use Scripture specifically in defending one’s faith-- the Catholic Church does NOT believe in Sola Scriptura.

I agree words are only part of the equation, as is our example of our lives.

Actually, don’t want to quantify, only God knows what is too rarely. That said, if someone commonly or often tip-toes around having to mention the name of Jesus outside of Mass, or tip-toes around utilizing Scripture outside of Mass, that doesn’t seem to be consistent with the quotes provided from the Catechism.

God bless,

Michael

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

One of my Catholic friends explained it this way: “Catholics learn their faith by osmosis.”

In other words, the Catholic culture precludes actually studying or learning religion in any sort of methodical sort of way. Instead, Catholics just sort of pick it up as they go along.

Naturally, they miss a lot. And they get a lot of it wrong.

In fact, Fr. Benedict Groeschel once publicly stated (at least the time I heard him) that the really big scandal of the Church is the lack of teaching of the Faith to the laity.

Thank you for your reply. It would be tempting to ask your friend, if ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ, did they learn Scripture by osmosis?

“In other words, the Catholic culture precludes actually studying or learning religion in any sort of methodical sort of way. Instead, Catholics just sort of pick it up as they go along.”.
Do you think this is true? Jesus didn’t teach in a purposeful way, just let the apostles pick things up here and there? What fields of study to we allow study or learning to be devoid of a methodical approach to some extent? Certainly our faith is much more important, and thus we should do the same and more in regards to learning and practicing our faith as we do to other fields of study. Medical students learn by some osmosis during their time in the hospital, however they also have textbooks with methodical learning on which to base this osmosis. How many of us would trust a medical student or doctor who learned only be osmosis and didn’t study the textbooks or pass the tests?

God bless,

Michael

 

[Yerusalyim]

In fact, Fr. Benedict Groeschel once publicly stated (at least the time I heard him) that the really big scandal of the Church is the lack of teaching of the Faith to the laity. The consequences are not only Scripural illiteracy but also ignorance of Church history, the lives of the saints, Church culture and doctrine, etc.

AMEN, this is my single biggest criticism of the Church…we don’t cathecize the faithful enough…and documents of the Church need to be written at a different level, so the faithful can read and understand them…scholars writing to scholars in scholarly prose makes for an uneducated laity.

Those who question your Catholicism are somewhat old fashioned…there was a time you didn’t question anything about the Church.

Continue to beat the drum on the celibacy issue, it’s your right under Canon Law to do so. I, too, am one of those who think the Church should go to optional celibacy as our EC churches are.

And, I concur that we would be no less Christian, and Christ would be no less God if the Dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity had not been defined…but I accept the doctrine.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Thank you for your reply. It would be tempting to ask your friend, if ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ, did they learn Scripture by osmosis?

“In other words, the Catholic culture precludes actually studying or learning religion in any sort of methodical sort of way. Instead, Catholics just sort of pick it up as they go along.”.
Do you think this is true? Jesus didn’t teach in a purposeful way, just let the apostles pick things up here and there? What fields of study to we allow study or learning to be devoid of a methodical approach to some extent? Certainly our faith is much more important, and thus we should do the same and more in regards to learning and practicing our faith as we do to other fields of study. Medical students learn by some osmosis during their time in the hospital, however they also have textbooks with methodical learning on which to base this osmosis. How many of us would trust a medical student or doctor who learned only be osmosis and didn’t study the textbooks or pass the tests?

God bless,

Michael

You are being way too sophisticated in your reply to my post.

I would venture to say that most Catholics are simply unaware of the issues and would be unable to even address your comments. In my opinion, most Catholics are unable to discuss the equivalence (or non-equivalence) [the old “contrast and compare” essay question] of the study of medicine and the study of religion.

I am only describing what, in my opinion, is an accurate description of the level of education of the average Catholic. I am neither attacking nor defending my friend.

To ask for some explanation or discussion of “ignorance of Scripture or ignorance of Christ” would be presuming an ability that may not be there, perhaps apart from some residual understanding derived from listening to the Sunday Mass scriptural readings and homilies.

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

I think there are many Catholics who do not know their faith. It seems to be generally agreed upon that Catechisis in the Church was terrible for a great number of years. I believe that is all changing now, thanks be to God. I believe He has breathed new life into the Church, particularly in the area of Bible study and apologetics. Ironically, IMO, God has used many former protestant converts to Catholicism to do this. So, I expect that in the next 20 years or so, there will be enormous changes in the life of lay people in the Church. I have seen Catholic Bible studies popping up all over the internet and all through my community.

That being said, I think you have a point about Catholics not really “acting” Catholic. I’m not talking about folks like you that question a few teachings. It is healthy to question so that you can learn. However, folks who go to Mass only on Christmas and Easter, practice birth control, or support abortion are NOT acting according to the faith. These sorts of things really wound the Church. Do any of us have the right to judge you? No, of course not. But we do have an obligation to instruct you. So, if you have a question about, say, the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mother, we would have an obligation to share with you what we know. Some people can come off rather high handed when they do that, and that is not right.

I think that some Catholics don’t like playing “scripture wars” when it comes to defending their faith. You know, they cite a verse, then the protestant counters with a verse that seemingly counters the first verse, etc. The truth is that scripture has to be taken in context and as a whole. You can’t use one verse to contradict another-- you have to see that they go together. I believe that the Catholic Church is the only one that harmonizes all of scripture-- though I know there are millions out there who would disagree-- that is my personal conclusion. Anyway, when you get pulled into a scripture quoting contest, it gets difficult because not all of the Church’s teachings are directly taught in scripture. I’m fine with that, personally, because I believe in the teaching authority of the Church. But, it can get frustrating trying to defend, say, the Assumption, from scripture alone.

 

[Al_Masetti]

AMEN, this is my single biggest criticism of the Church…we don’t cathecize the faithful enough…and documents of the Church need to be written at a different level, so the faithful can read and understand them…scholars writing to scholars in scholarly prose makes for an uneducated laity.

Those who question your Catholicism are somewhat old fashioned…there was a time you didn’t question anything about the Church.

Continue to beat the drum on the celibacy issue, it’s your right under Canon Law to do so. I, too, am one of those who think the Church should go to optional celibacy as our EC churches are.

And, I concur that we would be no less Christian, and Christ would be no less God if the Dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity had not been defined…but I accept the doctrine.

The issue of questioning things or discussing celibacy as an option, etc, is too sophisticated.

For DECADES my main complaint was that the only contact the average person in the pew had with the Church was at Sunday Mass … and that the priest NEVER explained anything or taught anything. Priests would respond by saying that they were forbidden to TEACH at Mass; they were only permitted to PREACH.

For DECADES I fought (and failed) to get a once-a-year “narrated Mass”, in which the priest sort of stepped aside every couple of minutes and explained what he just did or just said. I actually experienced such a “narrated Mass”, but it was during a Lenten retreat during the work week … and it was in 1966 and it took place in central Thailand [by an American missionary priest who at the time worked in northern Thailand].

The only “victory” so far in my “quest” was finding Catholic Answers.

A few years ago, I got invited to meet Cardinal Avery Dulles; I thought it was going to be one of his semi-annual McGinley Lectures at Fordham. Instead it was eight people gathered in the conference room of his office. I asked him about Catholic evangelization, etc, and he said that the Church had spent millions and had nothing to show for it. At the time, he was not familiar with Catholic Answers. However, since then, he has worked with Karl Keating on a couple of books.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Al, while I understand and sympathize with you, I’m sorry, but ‘narrated Masses’ are not just permitted. A Mass is a Mass and it has rubrics it has to follow. It isn’t a presentation only. However, that being said, I am entirely in favor of the priest having, OUTSIDE THE MASS, a day, or even several days, where he, WITHOUT ACTUALLY SAYING THE MASS, takes the people in attendance, through use perhaps of a projector, or with a VCR/DVD etc of a televised Mass from EWTN or some such, and ‘pausing’, explaining WHAT the priest is doing, WHAT he is saying, and WHY.

This would give exactly the same information you require, yet not be against the rules which do prescribe a “narrated Mass” (Yes, I know you attended one but you and I know that many things are and have been ‘done’ in the liturgy which should NOT have been done.

Why not see if you and others can work up a demonstration as I suggest above?

God bless.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

The OP topic about scriptural illiteracy is one thing. The peripheral comments are triangulation which are best addressed to the original participants in the threads in question. The trouble is that a lot of those folks have gone on to discuss those thread topics rather than continuing to engage mt.

 

[clmowry]

Ok I give, where in the world do you get this idea that “Catholics” “rarely” mention the name of Jesus or read scripture?

Let’s see as a minimum I use Jesus’ name 75 times a day. (And that’s just during the Rosary I say with my family. So that’s 4x75 = 300 in my house. Used to be 6x75 but two of the kids are away at school. So they, hopefully, are saying them on their own.)

When I find my self in need of His help, I often invoke my favorite prayer. “Jesus. Jesus. Jesus.” Short hand for…“Jesus, who came down from Heaven. Jesus who died for my sins. Jesus in whom I hope come to my aid.”

I read scripture daily, and “every” Catholic gets a good dose of scripture every time they go to mass.

Frankly I think your arguing against a stawman of your own creation.

Are there “bad Catholics” out there who seldom or never read scripture and seldom if ever mention the name of Jesus?

Sure there are.

You can find “bad” examples of of every religous group on the planet.

So whats your point?

Chuck

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Very good point, Ani.

I do think though that the OP, as another poster commented, is attempting to extrapolate data from entirely too small a sample (‘several’ Catholics have ‘questioned his stance’ on ‘certain topics’; certainly one topic is a discipline and can be changed, the second though is a dogma and must be believed).

Perhaps one difficulty the OP has is that he is attempting, not only to compare apples and oranges, but is also insisting that others strictly conform to “HIS” interpretation of what HE thinks ‘questioning’ means. . . while in his stead, he ignores the obvious fact that others have THEIR interpretations of what is meant by "questioning’ and that, particularly among Catholics in a Catholic forum, their interpretation is certainly worthy of consideration.

Meaning, as another poster noted, a ‘thin skinned’ interpretation that others are unfairly attacking, or (worse yet) are attempting to argue in a 'wrong" (i.e., what the OP CONSIDERS 'unScriptural) way, and are not as 'Scripturally literate" as he would have them be, is perhaps the real root of this problem which, quite possibly, is not in actuality a problem of the ‘other posters’ but of the OP.

I do not know and I cannot judge heart or soul, but it does seem to me that for a poster to be ‘on the offensive’ and to make such a blanket generalization of CONDEMNATION for fellow Catholics says more about that poster’s POV and state of mind. For after all, only he knows HIS heart-he cannot really know those others whom he castigates as 'Scriptural illterates", correct?

 

[RobHom]

Below are quotes from the beginning of the Catechism, and from the Catechism concerning Scripture. In relationship to these, my question is:

If a Catholic rarely mentions Jesus Christ as their savior so that others may know the only true God and reflect the gospel by their words and daily life, and rarely, if at all, mentions Scripture in sharing or defending their faith, then are they really living their faith? Are they really Catholic? And do they have any right question whether someone else is Catholic?

Michael,s

Speaking as a 57 year old Catholic… I can honestly tell you that when I went to Catechism and Catholic Schools as a child, we were never taught in the vein that Jesus Christ was our Saviour, at least not in the terms that I would apply to protestants. The focus was much 'broader" …if that is the right word.

My real education as to my “faith” began much later in life. Nowadays I work very hard to live my faith and while I may not be the greatest “sharer”…I have no problem “defending” my faith or the Church, and doing so scripturally.

I think it is our duty to question one another, especially in forums like this, and even in real life. Not long ago… I witnessed a self proclaimed “former Catholic” trying to convert a real “Catholic” to his new “wonderful” church. I acted interested, and he asked me if I had any questions…and yes I did, and I asked them. He couldn’t answer even the most basic of questions about Catholicism… I looked at the fellow who was Catholic… and asked “What are you going to do?”… He said he was going to stay Catholic…he understood what had transpired. Yes, there are fakes about…they are like wolves in sheep’s clothing… snake oil salesmen… So, if questioned…don’t take offense if you are Catholic… just want to make sure you know the “secret handshake”

I ask because several Catholics on this forum have questioned whether I am Catholic, since I disagree with required celibacy for priests,

I have openly questioned this for years. Other Catholic denominations allow Priests to marry… But it is not mine to change…but my thoughts and questions are not treason to the Church…its just my opinion…

and am uncertain whether it is important to our faith if Mary is or is not a perpetual virgin.

I believe this dogma is crucial to our faith, as is her sinlessness and Assumption…

Then I realized, I don’t recall any of those who have questioned my faith mentioning Jesus or referring to Sacred Scripture. Often seems more focused on the Church being perfect, whether Protestants can agree on anything, and how awful Luther was. Someone even characterized mentioning Scripture as throwing out a road block. Are many Catholics that uncomfortable with the Church’s Sacred Scripture?

Were I discuss Catholicism with you… there are many things I would ask about. Christ included. I don’t go too deep into scripture…because I am not a “Bible Scholar” who was trained properly in a Catholic Seminary or University. Thus…I tend to keep many of my thoughts to myself, lest I be accused of being a false teacher. I don’t think Catholics in general are “uncomfortable” at all… they probably think something akin to what I do. Considering that 99.99% of the protestants in this world belonging to how many thousands of denominations and or groups can’t agree on scriptural interpretations… its a pretty safe thing to abstain from.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

You are being way too sophisticated in your reply to my post.

I would venture to say that most Catholics are simply unaware of the issues and would be unable to even address your comments. In my opinion, most Catholics are unable to discuss the equivalence (or non-equivalence) [the old “contrast and compare” essay question] of the study of medicine and the study of religion.

I am only describing what, in my opinion, is an accurate description of the level of education of the average Catholic. I am neither attacking nor defending my friend.

To ask for some explanation or discussion of “ignorance of Scripture or ignorance of Christ” would be presuming an ability that may not be there, perhaps apart from some residual understanding derived from listening to the Sunday Mass scriptural readings and homilies.

My apologies, I liked your response, and apologize if my response was more sophisticated than would be edifying. Though I would not consider myself very sophisticated.

Peace,

Michael

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Michael,s

Speaking as a 57 year old Catholic… I can honestly tell you that when I went to Catechism and Catholic Schools as a child, we were never taught in the vein that Jesus Christ was our Saviour, at least not in the terms that I would apply to protestants. The focus was much 'broader" …if that is the right word.

My real education as to my “faith” began much later in life. Nowadays I work very hard to live my faith and while I may not be the greatest “sharer”…I have no problem “defending” my faith or the Church, and doing so scripturally.

I think it is our duty to question one another, especially in forums like this, and even in real life. Not long ago… I witnessed a self proclaimed “former Catholic” trying to convert a real “Catholic” to his new “wonderful” church. I acted interested, and he asked me if I had any questions…and yes I did, and I asked them. He couldn’t answer even the most basic of questions about Catholicism… I looked at the fellow who was Catholic… and asked “What are you going to do?”… He said he was going to stay Catholic…he understood what had transpired. Yes, there are fakes about…they are like wolves in sheep’s clothing… snake oil salesmen… So, if questioned…don’t take offense if you are Catholic… just want to make sure you know the “secret handshake”

I have openly questioned this for years. Other Catholic denominations allow Priests to marry… But it is not mine to change…but my thoughts and questions are not treason to the Church…its just my opinion…

I believe this dogma is crucial to our faith, as is her sinlessness and Assumption…

Were I discuss Catholicism with you… there are many things I would ask about. Christ included. I don’t go too deep into scripture…because I am not a “Bible Scholar” who was trained properly in a Catholic Seminary or University. Thus…I tend to keep many of my thoughts to myself, lest I be accused of being a false teacher. I don’t think Catholics in general are “uncomfortable” at all… they probably think something akin to what I do. Considering that 99.99% of the protestants in this world belonging to how many thousands of denominations and or groups can’t agree on scriptural interpretations… its a pretty safe thing to abstain from.

RobHom,

 Thank you, excellent post. If I may make one comment, I'm not sure it's safe to abstain from scriptural interpretations. It has been both studying/interpreting/understanding Scripture hand-in-hand with the Catechims that leads me to more fully appreciate the real presence, baptism, the eucharist, and all of God's gifts, including marriage. From this I am more able to engage my Protestant friends in discussion. Telling them something is true and should believed because the Church is perfect and says so, is not that convincing for them. They want to understand, and the Scripture they know is of course handed down by the Catholic Church. Without the Church, as you and I know, there would be no NT canon. 

 Now, if one ends up disagreeing with a significant number of teachings, one should look to see why. And Scripture should be turned to for the purpose of understanding Church teaching, not to look for errors or something to disagree with. At the same time, I'm not so sure even our Cardinal understands everything the Church teaches, God's Word is so deep. The potiential danger with abstaining from interpreting/understanding Scripture is that some my blindly accept something that is not correct. For example, on the Catholic Channel yesterday morning, several callers mentioned that the priest at their parish said the miracle of the loaves and fish was not really a miracle, but sharing. Being educated and discerning helps know when to address and gently correct an error, and help keep others from being exposed to errors.

Anyway, thank you for your reply, I enjoyed reading it, and may God continue to bless you.

Michael

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Perhaps one difficulty the OP has is… insisting that others strictly conform to “HIS” interpretation of what HE thinks ‘questioning’ means…

…while in his stead, he ignores the obvious fact that others have THEIR interpretations of what is meant by "questioning’…

…Meaning, as another poster noted, a ‘thin skinned’ interpretation that others are unfairly attacking…

I think many of us would be more disposed to spending time on these ‘questions’ if mt would spend less time descending to the level of namecalling. And by namecalling, I am not referring to the quaint turn of phrase ‘scriptural illiterate.’

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Ok I give, where in the world do you get this idea that “Catholics” “rarely” mention the name of Jesus or read scripture?

Hello Chuck, Thank you for your response. Please note the OP was stated “If a Catholic rarely mentions Jesus Christ…”, as of course there are many Catholics who mention Jesus and are Scripture literate. What prompted the question was that it seemed some were questioning my Catholic faith, and when one characterized quoting Phil 4:4-9 as throwing out Scripture as a road block, it made me think about how often others actually utilize Scripture and mention Jesus. While many of the threads have people quoting all kinds of history and quotes of saints, etc… it surprises me how often Jesus and Scriptures are not part of the discussions. While I did have an unpleasant experience in another thread, I looked at other threads to see how accurate my impression was, and gave a link to one of the threads I looked at as an example.

I'm glad to hear you focus on Jesus when you pray, and read Scripture everyday. That's more than I often do. More to my question in the OP is how often in this forum and in every day life outsife of the house or family prayer, are Catholics comfortable talking about Jesus and Scriptures? Sure, some are. Are they the majority or minority. Do we see it as often as one would reasonable expect here on the forums?

  There is objective evidence, all one needs to do is look back at their posts and see how often they talk about Jesus and Scriptures. If it's in our hearts and not on our lips, are we being as Catholic as we are called to be?

Romans 10:8-9 “But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”–that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;”

So, do most Catholics confess this outside the comfort of Mass and their homes. Do we see it often in our words in this Catholic forum?

Michael