By what authority can you do this

[AmateurPianist]

In another thread I observed one Catholic post to another:

In that case, you might consider re-assessing your religions affiliation tag, since you have made it clear that you do not embrace Catholic faith.

My question is by what authority can a lay Catholic tell another lay Catholic that they “aren’t really Catholic”?

 

[thirdn6]

By the Teachings of the Church. If a catholic says… “I don’t believe this Church’s teaching… or that teaching…, etc.”, was corrected and still holds to his own personal views or beliefs, then he might really is not a Catholic. It is and will come out from his own mouth or actions.

Peace. But Truth must be told.
It is more important…

 

[2nd_Adam]

In another thread I observed one Catholic post to another:

My question is by what authority can a lay Catholic tell another lay Catholic that they “aren’t really Catholic”?

This is a very good thread topic, so thanks for your needed insight. As an outsider looking in, it appears that this kind of perspective is fuel for the fire as in witch hunting (burning at the stake for heresy).

http://bloguras.com/wp-content/imagenes/torture-devices-burning-at-the-stake.jpg

 

[Scottgun]

A lay Catholic has no authority to impose canonical penalties on another Catholic. The *do *have the right to petition the bishop to do so.

But I am assuming you mean this in the day-to-day discourse as a rhetorical device. Put simply, they don’t need the authority, they just need to present a good argument. That is, “Catholics believe in the Trinity. Joe doesn’t believe in the Trinity, therefore Joe is not a Catholic and should not be presenting himself for the Sacraments.”

 

[twopekinguys]

Without knowing the whole conversation, it is kind of hard to give a definite answer.

I’m sure you have realized that sometimes a person’s tone doesn’t always come through in what is written.

You could do what I did, read that comment once in an angry tone, then read it again, in a tone of humility. It could be taken as an insult, it could be taken as a gentle nudge or coaching.

Personally, I would like to see it as a gentle nudge or coaching.

(Unfortunately, I found where that comment was made, and I think it was meant as an insult. Which is really too bad.)

 

[ralphinal]

We have the duty to educate the ignorant and to admonish the sinner, but we cannot judge. That person who holds to views that are contrary to the Church may not know better or they may be having trouble understanding.

THere are some “Catholics” that I have no issue saying “You are not really Catholic,” but they are few and far between.

 

[Lutheranteach]

Well that makes me have to ask, as I know NO Catholic who says they agree, or even follow, all the Churches teachings. So, how many “rules” can you be outside of before one is for all intents and purposes non-Catholic.

 

[Tony_Souza]

Well that makes me have to ask, as I know NO Catholic who says they agree, or even follow, all the Churches teachings. So, how many “rules” can you be outside of before one is for all intents and purposes non-Catholic.

You can go ahead and put me down as the first Catholic you know who agrees and follows all the Church’s teachings. And believe it or not, there are a whole lot of us.

A large majority of the time, when someone does not believe or follow a particular practice, it is because they have been misguided, or are ignorant in that area. Most Catholics are well meaning, and think they are following Church teraching, but simply misunderstand. It is incumbent upon all Catholics to be humble, and to accept correction and reproof as it comes, so that we can more fully conform our lives to Christ, through His beautiful Bride, the Church.

 

[tee_eff_em]

My question is by what authority can a lay Catholic tell another lay Catholic that they “aren’t really Catholic”?

By very little if any authority. And, more importantly, from one lay Catholic to another I consider such a proclamation to carry zero weight. (Well, honestly, I think it does carry some weight, but often says more about the speaker than about the subject)

Similarly, there are many Catholics, in this forum and elsewhere, who flippantly make proclamation about the Catholicity of one public figure or another. But speaking for myself: If the bishops, who are charged with the care of those public figures’ souls, do not condemn them, I find very little reason nor authority by which I may do so.

:twocents:
tee
sinner

 

[AmateurPianist]

By the Teachings of the Church. If a catholic says… “I don’t believe this Church’s teaching… or that teaching…, etc.”, was corrected and still holds to his own personal views or beliefs, then he might really is not a Catholic. It is and will come out from his own mouth or actions.

Peace. But Truth must be told.
It is more important…

What if you and the other Catholic disagree as to what exactly the Church’s teaching is?

 

[AmateurPianist]

A lay Catholic has no authority to impose canonical penalties on another Catholic. The *do *have the right to petition the bishop to do so.

But I am assuming you mean this in the day-to-day discourse as a rhetorical device. Put simply, they don’t need the authority, they just need to present a good argument. That is, “Catholics believe in the Trinity. Joe doesn’t believe in the Trinity, therefore Joe is not a Catholic and should not be presenting himself for the Sacraments.”

So you as a lay Catholic have the authority to make a private judgment that another Catholic “is not really a Catholic”?

 

[AmateurPianist]

(Unfortunately, I found where that comment was made, and I think it was meant as an insult. Which is really too bad.)

I read it as an insult too.

Which to me had the opposite effect of telling me more concerning the person making the insult as opposed to the object of his wrath.

 

[AmateurPianist]

A lay Catholic has no authority to impose canonical penalties on another Catholic. The *do *have the right to petition the bishop to do so.

Hypothetic here.

Do you think that if any Catholic here squealed to the bishop concerning any Catholics posting on an internet forum, that the Bishop would then take action to excommunicate said Catholic? Has something like that ever happened before?

If the answers to these two questions are no (which I suspect they are), the question then becomes by what authority can a lay Catholic make this determination.

Maybe I am wrong, but I suspect that if the accuser were to make these accusations against the accused parishes priest (who actually knows the accused) that the accuser would be thrown out of the room, particularly if the priest knows the accused as a faithful member of his flock.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Well that makes me have to ask, as I know NO Catholic who says they agree, or even follow, all the Churches teachings. So, how many “rules” can you be outside of before one is for all intents and purposes non-Catholic.

That is a very good question.

What about the majority of Catholics who use and approve of artificial contraception? Are they “not Catholic”? So where is the line which you have to cross to be “not Catholic”?

 

[AmateurPianist]

By very little if any authority. And, more importantly, from one lay Catholic to another I consider such a proclamation to carry zero weight. (Well, honestly, I think it does carry some weight, but often says more about the speaker than about the subject)

Similarly, there are many Catholics, in this forum and elsewhere, who flippantly make proclamation about the Catholicity of one public figure or another. But speaking for myself: If the bishops, who are charged with the care of those public figures’ souls, do not condemn them, I find very little reason nor authority by which I may do so.

:twocents:
tee
sinner

That seems to be a very Catholic (and consistent) answer.

Some of the rest of you (including the person who made this accusation) sound like good (or more accurately not-so-good) Protestants.

Anyway, I am amazed and somewhat confused by the variety of answers I received to my supposedly simple question.

 

[twopekinguys]

Ultimately, we are all called to follow the Church’s teachings.

It is important to keep in mind 1. Everyone is in a different place in their faith journey. 2. We are all called to help and support our brothers and sisters in Christ, and help them stay the course.

With that being said. If I observe someone doing something that is against the teachings of the Church, there are a few ways it can be handled. 1. I could approach them in a kind and loving way, and say something like…“I noticed you did this, or that. I am having trouble understanding why you did this. Could you explain it to me?” 2. Tell your pastor, or Bishop and rat them out. 3. Come down on them like a ton of bricks and tell them to stop immediately.

I think you can see by those examples, that number 1 would probably be the best approach. It isn’t accusatory, so it is less confrontational, and should open up congenial discussion which could lead to correction. (I know, sometimes I live in an ideal world where everything is perfect…lol )

Now, as far as people not following all of the teachings of the Church, are they still Catholic?

It is not for me to judge that. That is between them and God. They have to answer for that someday, I don’t. I also don’t know if it is something that has been corrected, or even addressed in reconcilliation, so again, it isn’t for me to judge.

On a personal note, I will admit that I struggle sometimes with the church’s view on artifical insemination, or invitro-fertilization.

One one hand, I think it is a wonderful gift to aid in bringing a life into the world to a family that desperately wants children. Then I think about God’s will. God must have a plan for them if he has chosen for them not to have children naturally. Maybe it is his will for them to adopt one of the many many children with no parents.

I often discuss this in confession, but I always, always, always, uphold the church’s teachings on the issue.

Something else to remember is that even though a person may stray, and engage in birth control, artificial insemination, etc. There is always a way back. Reconcilliation.

I do know of a case in our parish where a gentleman came to me about being a sponsor for a candidate in RCIA. (I am the lay director for RCIA) He disclosed to me that he was living with a woman outside of marriage, and they had children together. He also told me that all three of our priests would no longer grant him absolution for that particluar sin, because he did nothing to resolve the situation (ie marry the woman). Regrettably, I had to refuse him the role of sponsor based on this, but that doesn’t mean I judged him, I merely upheld the teachings of the church. Is he still Catholic? I don’t know.

 

[Alindawyl]

My question is by what authority can a lay Catholic tell another lay Catholic that they “aren’t really Catholic”?

Not even the pope can tell someone who has been baptised Catholic that they aren’t really Catholic.

To the extent that our beliefs match Magisterial teaching, our beliefs are Catholic. To the extent that our beliefs differ from Magisterial teaching, our beliefs are not Catholic. But beliefs are not people. We ourselves are always Catholic once we are baptised. Baptism is forever and nothing can undo it.

What do you call a Catholic who has been excommunicated?

An excommunicated Catholic

 

[AmateurPianist]

Ultimately, we are all called to follow the Church’s teachings.

Who is the arbitrer of whether somebody follows the Church’s teachings or not?

 

[ralphinal]

Who is the arbitrer of whether somebody follows the Church’s teachings or not?

Unless you say that you do not follow them, only God. If you say that you disagree, you have become that judge.

 

[Scottgun]

Hypothetic here.

Do you think that if any Catholic here squealed to the bishop concerning any Catholics posting on an internet forum, that the Bishop would then take action to excommunicate said Catholic? Has something like that ever happened before?

If the answers to these two questions are no (which I suspect they are), the question then becomes by what authority can a lay Catholic make this determination.

Maybe I am wrong, but I suspect that if the accuser were to make these accusations against the accused parishes priest (who actually knows the accused) that the accuser would be thrown out of the room, particularly if the priest knows the accused as a faithful member of his flock.

No. Probably not because it is unrealistic. But there have been plenty of instances where a Catholic has created a public scandal, laypeople have written to their bishop, the bishop examined the evidence, and censured the offender. The bishop generally is not going to bother looking into dissent from the average layperson. But if that layperson has a teaching position in the diocese and publically denies Church teachings, it is more likely that the bishop will intervene. So, in answer to your recent question “Who is the arbitrer of whether somebody follows the Church’s teachings or not?” The bishop is (which I think is part of why he is called the ordinary). As another put it, a layperson saying another person is not a Catholic carries no authoritative weight. However, that doesn’t mean we ignore facts in front of our nose. Some Church teachings are complicated, otheres are not. Some are binding on the faithful and some are not. And they are all readily available for anyone to look up. So when one person says I don’t accept x Church teaching, and another says that Church teaching is binding on the faithful and backs it up, saying that person has no authority instead of engaging his argument is pretty cheesy.