B
buffalo
Guest
Penny Plain:
An additional thing one needs to understand is prudential judgement.
- Status
B
buffalo
Guest
Les Richardson:
JPII said the same thing a few years back, after he was battered with people telling him if he doesn’t get in step with society then he will lose his flock. The Pope replied basically (paraphrasing) - “then we will have a smaller but more faithful Church.”
L
LittleDeb
Guest
Wow. I almost died and I judged others? I am so sorry it came across that way.
Without getting into too many personal details, it was condoms that almost killed me. (latex allergy that I seem to have in one, er, “location” only. My hands don’t flare up from gloves strangely enough.) The hormonal stuff for my endometriosis just almost cost me my fertility but not my life. Though who knows long term what might have developed. On this forum I try to give enough info to say that I can understand the perspective but not too much to protect my privacy. Facing death head-on through unforseen circumstances that could happen again is something very close to my heart. (There is more to the story but not appropriate here.)
My post was really about how a Church teaching that was offered with love and compassion saved my life. The contraception stuff had been what was shoved down my throat. I am aware that for some that has not been the case.
The anger and frustration sent my way is understandable. I posted to express how painful it was for me to not be in union with Church teachings. I know, for myself, that pain was nearly impossible to bear sometimes. I lashed out in anger a lot during those years.
My heart and prayers go out to all those who are struggling with any teachings. It can be such a frustrating place to be. I admire all people who have the courage to continue in their journey with Christ despite what can be major setbacks.
C
Catholic_Heart
Guest
<<<All I can say is that I pray for those who so feel so confident in God’s love and mercy to pick and choose which teachings to conveniently obey.>>>
When I read the posts on this forum I hear a lot of legalism and a lot of holier than thou rhetoric. There is often little charity, or a sincere effort to find out where people are really coming from. They simply assume that the so-called Cafeteria Catholic who finds it impossible to follow every rule and regulation of the Church does so in a cavilier (sp) way,
There are issues that I struggle with…Not in a public way (which could cause scandal), but in my heart. Birth control is one of those issues. I believe, along with another poster, that there is a huge difference in preventing a fertiliztion by a barrier method and preventing a birth by a method that may cause a spontaneous abortion (often unknown). I also believe that abortion, at any stage of pregnancy, is murder…No one has the right to purposely kill an unborn child, or one that is in the process of being born. I find the whole idea to be abhorant.
There are woman for whom pregnancy is a life-threatening event. Those women, especially if they have children at home, should not, if it is not their wish, become pregnant. To leave children wihout their Mother is something to be avoided. If my daughter were in that kind of postion, I would encourage her to use a safe, non abortifaciant method of birth control.
**Another matter that I think is carrying things too far is to say that condoms should NEVER be used…Not even when the user knows he has AIDS…And, I always have to laugh at the idea of a condom with a hole in it for collecting sperm samples for medical purposes…or the idea that one may not masturbate in order to obtain a sperm sample for said medical purposes…Surely this is not a particularly pleasurable experience for most men. I just think such things are silly, and being too legalistic. **
Jesus was decidedly not happy with those who followed the rules at all costs…No matter who got hurt, or what the consequences…I often get the feeling on this forum, and another one that I sometimes visit, that the rule is the thing…not the person, or the faith…just the rule…or the teaching, if you will. Is it enough to simpley “pray, pay and obey”…I don’t think so.
**I am not saying that Church teachings are not important, or that Catholics should not make a sincere effort to follow them. What I am saying is that being human is a precarious business. We, none of us, is perfect, and to expect perfect obedience is absurd…It is enough to do our best, and trust God to understand our motives and our hearts when we fail. **
So…Why am I here…Posting on a forum that I sometimes find a haven for the rigid and the self-righteous? I am hear because there is also an abundance of good stuff. I find much affirmation of my faith, and a lot of good advice. I find a wonderful sense of joy at being Catholic, a joy I share. And, I am pleased when I see those who disagree with others speak up…Makes for much more interesting reading!
Keep the faith…Love the Lord, and have charity toward others…Calling people names…even something like Cafeteria Catholic is often hurtful, and not productive.
When I read the posts on this forum I hear a lot of legalism and a lot of holier than thou rhetoric. There is often little charity, or a sincere effort to find out where people are really coming from. They simply assume that the so-called Cafeteria Catholic who finds it impossible to follow every rule and regulation of the Church does so in a cavilier (sp) way,
There are issues that I struggle with…Not in a public way (which could cause scandal), but in my heart. Birth control is one of those issues. I believe, along with another poster, that there is a huge difference in preventing a fertiliztion by a barrier method and preventing a birth by a method that may cause a spontaneous abortion (often unknown). I also believe that abortion, at any stage of pregnancy, is murder…No one has the right to purposely kill an unborn child, or one that is in the process of being born. I find the whole idea to be abhorant.
There are woman for whom pregnancy is a life-threatening event. Those women, especially if they have children at home, should not, if it is not their wish, become pregnant. To leave children wihout their Mother is something to be avoided. If my daughter were in that kind of postion, I would encourage her to use a safe, non abortifaciant method of birth control.
**Another matter that I think is carrying things too far is to say that condoms should NEVER be used…Not even when the user knows he has AIDS…And, I always have to laugh at the idea of a condom with a hole in it for collecting sperm samples for medical purposes…or the idea that one may not masturbate in order to obtain a sperm sample for said medical purposes…Surely this is not a particularly pleasurable experience for most men. I just think such things are silly, and being too legalistic. **
Jesus was decidedly not happy with those who followed the rules at all costs…No matter who got hurt, or what the consequences…I often get the feeling on this forum, and another one that I sometimes visit, that the rule is the thing…not the person, or the faith…just the rule…or the teaching, if you will. Is it enough to simpley “pray, pay and obey”…I don’t think so.
**I am not saying that Church teachings are not important, or that Catholics should not make a sincere effort to follow them. What I am saying is that being human is a precarious business. We, none of us, is perfect, and to expect perfect obedience is absurd…It is enough to do our best, and trust God to understand our motives and our hearts when we fail. **
So…Why am I here…Posting on a forum that I sometimes find a haven for the rigid and the self-righteous? I am hear because there is also an abundance of good stuff. I find much affirmation of my faith, and a lot of good advice. I find a wonderful sense of joy at being Catholic, a joy I share. And, I am pleased when I see those who disagree with others speak up…Makes for much more interesting reading!
Keep the faith…Love the Lord, and have charity toward others…Calling people names…even something like Cafeteria Catholic is often hurtful, and not productive.
R
Ruthie
Guest
Catholic Heart, you said,
“There are woman for whom pregnancy is a life-threatening event. … If my daughter were in that kind of postion, I would encourage her to use a safe, non abortifaciant method of birth control.”
I honestly, genuinely, seriously do not understand this. I understand very well your desire to see your daughter safe! Make no mistake there.
NFP, understood and followed, is every bit as good, if not better, a way of preventing pregnancy than any barrier method.
More than that - what’s the matter with abstention? It’s guaranteed to prevent pregnancy 100 per cent. (Well, except for the BVM!)
I’m a passionate person, as is my husband. But if pregnancy was life threatening, and I chose not to take the risk, we could both abstain - out of love for each other.
Back on topic: To call one’s self a Catholic, yet not obey one of the Church’s teachings, is like being married but choosing to disobey the “forsaking all others” part. (Or any other part. DH gets sooo whiny and demanding when he’s sick, I sometimes wish I could forget the “in sickness or in health” part…)
Plus, I think the 2000 years of experience the Church brings down to us just might contain more wisdom than my 53 year old brain…
“There are woman for whom pregnancy is a life-threatening event. … If my daughter were in that kind of postion, I would encourage her to use a safe, non abortifaciant method of birth control.”
I honestly, genuinely, seriously do not understand this. I understand very well your desire to see your daughter safe! Make no mistake there.
NFP, understood and followed, is every bit as good, if not better, a way of preventing pregnancy than any barrier method.
More than that - what’s the matter with abstention? It’s guaranteed to prevent pregnancy 100 per cent. (Well, except for the BVM!)
I’m a passionate person, as is my husband. But if pregnancy was life threatening, and I chose not to take the risk, we could both abstain - out of love for each other.
Back on topic: To call one’s self a Catholic, yet not obey one of the Church’s teachings, is like being married but choosing to disobey the “forsaking all others” part. (Or any other part. DH gets sooo whiny and demanding when he’s sick, I sometimes wish I could forget the “in sickness or in health” part…)
Plus, I think the 2000 years of experience the Church brings down to us just might contain more wisdom than my 53 year old brain…
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Let’s clarify what that 2000 years of experience says.Back on topic: To call one’s self a Catholic, yet not obey one of the Church’s teachings, is like being married but choosing to disobey the “forsaking all others” part. (Or any other part. DH gets sooo whiny and demanding when he’s sick, I sometimes wish I could forget the “in sickness or in health” part…)
Plus, I think the 2000 years of experience the Church brings down to us just might contain more wisdom than my 53 year old brain…
As far as I can gather from this forum including AAA, I am in fact Catholic based on my having been baptized when I was a week old. That is the 2000 year old teaching.
To deny that I am not “really” Catholic because in your opinion I disobey, whether stubbornly or not, one or more Church teachings, is to deny those same 2000 year old Church teachings you claim to be defending. :whacky:
That’s the part I can’t seem to get through. It is OK to ignore Church teaching when it comes to telling a brother he is not “really” Catholic (translation: whatever you are don’t claim to be any relative of mine) but it is not OK to ignore those parts of the Church teaching that give you an excuse to reject that your family members are, in fact, your family members.
Now let’s look at how silly this is, if we assume a “good” orthodox Catholic is implying that a “bad” heterodox (probably cradle) Catholic should refrain from calling themselves Catholic. Here’s where that leaves us.
Bad heterodox: does not accept Church teaching on one or more matters.
Good orthodox: does not accept Church teaching on one or more matters.
I guess it isn’t so much whether you pick and choose what the Church teaches that makes you heterodox, but the precise selection of Church teachings you ignore. If you ignore the part about who is a Catholic, you’re a virtual saint, protecting the Church from having to deal with sinners. If you ignore some esoteric truth about the lack of sexual activity about Mary, then I should be cast overboard. Sounds like a double standard to me. You (again present company excepted) hold me bound to honor the sanctity of the rules you yourselves selectively ignore in order to gain illicit license to deny another Catholic his place in the family.
Which rule is divisive when one breaks it and which isn’t? If a person denies some abstract feature of Church teaching that never involves practical implication except whether it is believed, or if a person denies a Church teaching for the purpose of judging another less worthy of the label “Catholic” than oneself. Which is the type of thing Jesus forgave, and which is the kind Jesus rebuked strongly?
I suppose the ends justify the means, though. If we accomplish our goal of driving out those Catholics whom are troublesome, than the sins that had to be committed in getting that accomplished are justified because now the Church is more faithful.
Reminds me just a bit of some of Luke 11. I just can’t find the part where He says that if you know all the Church rules, you should pressure those who do not follow them to the letter to shape up or ship out.
He who has ears, let him hear.
Alan
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Likewise I pray for those who consider themselves teachers, but who feel so confident in God’s love and marcy they pick and choose which teachings to conveniently obey in their zeal to judge others and suggest they should abandon the family name.
Right, and since God said that what you do to the least of my brothers, you do unto Him, then by telling another sinner they are a worse sinner than ourselves (and therefore the least among our brothers) we are placing our personal desires or beliefs ahead of what God taught us, and as an added bonus telling Christ to get out of the Church.
Right, and when we bend Christ’s teachings and that of his Church to point the way out for our brethren, just because it is “rough terrain” to try to convince them with our brilliant apologetics and evangelism expertise, then yes they think they are always going north because their compass needle is painted on.
Really? He didn’t wash His cup, and then defended those who accused them of breaking the rules. His people picked grain on Sunday, breaking the rules due to the particular situation – which was they were hungry. What is all this about Jesus being such an absolutist about following the letter of the law? He was about fulfilling the law, but giving the part that cannot be defined with words. Since we do not teach how we are to conform our minds and hearts to Him, we don’t do it and try to reach Him by intellectual prowess alone, substituting human emotions for the stirrings of the Spirit.
When did Jesus tell Mary Magdelene to sin nor more? Are you referring to the feet washing incident where Mary showed herself to be more loving and worthy than those Full Mental Assent people who judged her? If that’s the case then please point me to the Bible version and verse because I haven’t found one where He tells her to go and sin no more. This is a popular misconception of the “anti-relativism” speak which justifies condemning sexual sins in others, on the premise that Jesus did it. He did not from any Bible version I can find. It’s curious that those who bolster their case to judge make up things Christ didn’t say to support their personal desires to be rid of those who don’t meet with our approval.
How do we know that isn’t exactly what she did? Christ just forgave her sins and told her to go in peace.
How does that compare with meeting your maker when you have lived a life of self-righteous judgment of others, bending the Church teachings and making up stuff that Christ supposedly said but isn’t in the Bible, to advance the agenda of spiritual cleansing and encourage the “marginal” or “almost lost” sheep to leave the flock so they won’t make the place so hypocritical? Which is worse, committing a sexual sin through weakness of the flesh and “wishful thinking” to ignore the Church teaching, or presuming oneself to be a teacher and then leading some of the marginal, or “little ones” astray.
I have not yet heard of any set of humanly discernable criteria whereby one Catholic can objectively determine that another has committed a mortal sin and is culpable for it. Therefore, if you insist on judging and are confident enough to stand before God having done so, be aware that all such judgments are surface observations, themselves subjective and relative.
Alan
N
ncjohn
Guest
As a side note, there is actually no place in the Bible that I’m aware of where it says that Mary Magdalene was a prosititute. She was delivered from seven demons, but it never says what they were. It is only “tradition” that grew up afterwards that painted her as a prosititute.
Sorry to go off-thread, but that assertion always bothers me since it has taken on such a life of its own.
Peace,
John
L
Lux_et_veritas
Guest
Alan,
I’ve been addressing dissenting behavior in Catholics. This does not include people who know about a teaching and struggle with understanding of that teaching. There are many Catholics who obey church teaching just on faith alone, as it should be. Do we all do this? I have thumbed my nose at a church teaching or so in the past, and so I too, am guilty of dissenting behavior (and have confessed this about 3 months ago).
True dissenters thumb their nose blatantly at a teaching because they feel they know better than the Church. This is the behavior I am talking about. The Church has had 2000 years of refined comprehension. Who am I, at 43, or 100 for that matter, with degrees or no degrees, to say I know how to form my own conscience and don’t need the guidance of the Church for that task?
When we struggle with understanding a teaching in such a way as to give us difficulty to assent, taking us into dissent either in thought, word or action, then it is time to make an appointment and meet with a priest to discuss it. I’ve seen people take issues like this into a priest to tell him a thing or two, as opposed to approaching the priest in humility, asking God to send His Spirit to give us at least enough understanding to aid our assent through the priests words. Since understanding is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, God will often oblige when a humble and obedient heart approaches Him through such efforts. By obedient heart, I mean that one is prepared to accept even answers that may be uncomfortable or undesireable, and willing to follow. It may take time, but eventually understanding comes.
For a dissenting action, there is often an underlying root aside from the issue at hand that is at play. In many cases, but not all, pride, arrogance, indifference to authority or even contempt for authority are in play. I certainly cannot judge whether any of these are at the root of someone’s dissent on teachings. I can see where some of my words may have led some to feel I was doing this, but it was not intended. If I gave that impression, I apologize.
However, a confessor can determine these things, or a spiritual director.
Here is a question I recently posed on another forum to a priest. Read the question and then continue reading…
oldforum.catholic.org/discussion/messages/41/856617.html?1121563382
I am struggling with this, but not dissenting on it. I am working on assent and it will mean difficult times ahead for me within my own family. However, after the priest explained himself I started to really chew on his words. Bottom line is that if I do what I want, in the case that is stated, which is to attend such a wedding, I am essentially encouraging infidelity with the wife to whom he is still married in the eyes of the Catholic Church. So, I now understand why he says the vast majority of theologians say we should not attend such weddings. This may be seem harsh. However, consider that it involves two baptized Catholics with a previously valid Catholic marriage. I talked to my confessor about having encouraged him to date, while divorced and no annulment. I got spiritually spanked in the most kind manner and must right the wrong by telling him I erred in the counsel I gave him. I literally encouraged him to sin!
I know there are some on this forum who won’t see this as sinful. However, when I asked the question in that particular forum, I humbled myself beforehand that I may not like the answer and prepared myself to deal with what I must do to live a life of truth.
Such painful decisions are always going to be a part of life for those who follow Christ.
All I’m trying to say in my posts is that when we run into a struggle, we need to take whatever steps are necessary to help us to assent. In meanwhile, we should have enough trust in the Holy Spirit to have guided the Holy Mother Church, to follow the teaching even when we do not fully understand it yet.
If you read through conversion stories of those who have shifted from dissenting positions to fully assenting to all Church teachings and obeying them, even without understanding, you will see that a root behavior was developed or graced from God into these people - the desire to humble themselves and obey, and to follow truth. Such people have learned that our minds can be our own worst enemy and that our conscience is best developed in light of the teachings of the Catholic Church, not in spite of them.
There is an excellent story in this months issue of Inside the Vatican of a young twenty-something who shifted in this manner. It is the same thing I went through and the same thing I’ve read from other former true “dissenters”. Unfortunately, this article is not accessible on their webpage.
insidethevatican.com/
Peace!
I’ve been addressing dissenting behavior in Catholics. This does not include people who know about a teaching and struggle with understanding of that teaching. There are many Catholics who obey church teaching just on faith alone, as it should be. Do we all do this? I have thumbed my nose at a church teaching or so in the past, and so I too, am guilty of dissenting behavior (and have confessed this about 3 months ago).
True dissenters thumb their nose blatantly at a teaching because they feel they know better than the Church. This is the behavior I am talking about. The Church has had 2000 years of refined comprehension. Who am I, at 43, or 100 for that matter, with degrees or no degrees, to say I know how to form my own conscience and don’t need the guidance of the Church for that task?
When we struggle with understanding a teaching in such a way as to give us difficulty to assent, taking us into dissent either in thought, word or action, then it is time to make an appointment and meet with a priest to discuss it. I’ve seen people take issues like this into a priest to tell him a thing or two, as opposed to approaching the priest in humility, asking God to send His Spirit to give us at least enough understanding to aid our assent through the priests words. Since understanding is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, God will often oblige when a humble and obedient heart approaches Him through such efforts. By obedient heart, I mean that one is prepared to accept even answers that may be uncomfortable or undesireable, and willing to follow. It may take time, but eventually understanding comes.
For a dissenting action, there is often an underlying root aside from the issue at hand that is at play. In many cases, but not all, pride, arrogance, indifference to authority or even contempt for authority are in play. I certainly cannot judge whether any of these are at the root of someone’s dissent on teachings. I can see where some of my words may have led some to feel I was doing this, but it was not intended. If I gave that impression, I apologize.
However, a confessor can determine these things, or a spiritual director.
Here is a question I recently posed on another forum to a priest. Read the question and then continue reading…
oldforum.catholic.org/discussion/messages/41/856617.html?1121563382
I am struggling with this, but not dissenting on it. I am working on assent and it will mean difficult times ahead for me within my own family. However, after the priest explained himself I started to really chew on his words. Bottom line is that if I do what I want, in the case that is stated, which is to attend such a wedding, I am essentially encouraging infidelity with the wife to whom he is still married in the eyes of the Catholic Church. So, I now understand why he says the vast majority of theologians say we should not attend such weddings. This may be seem harsh. However, consider that it involves two baptized Catholics with a previously valid Catholic marriage. I talked to my confessor about having encouraged him to date, while divorced and no annulment. I got spiritually spanked in the most kind manner and must right the wrong by telling him I erred in the counsel I gave him. I literally encouraged him to sin!
I know there are some on this forum who won’t see this as sinful. However, when I asked the question in that particular forum, I humbled myself beforehand that I may not like the answer and prepared myself to deal with what I must do to live a life of truth.
Such painful decisions are always going to be a part of life for those who follow Christ.
All I’m trying to say in my posts is that when we run into a struggle, we need to take whatever steps are necessary to help us to assent. In meanwhile, we should have enough trust in the Holy Spirit to have guided the Holy Mother Church, to follow the teaching even when we do not fully understand it yet.
If you read through conversion stories of those who have shifted from dissenting positions to fully assenting to all Church teachings and obeying them, even without understanding, you will see that a root behavior was developed or graced from God into these people - the desire to humble themselves and obey, and to follow truth. Such people have learned that our minds can be our own worst enemy and that our conscience is best developed in light of the teachings of the Catholic Church, not in spite of them.
There is an excellent story in this months issue of Inside the Vatican of a young twenty-something who shifted in this manner. It is the same thing I went through and the same thing I’ve read from other former true “dissenters”. Unfortunately, this article is not accessible on their webpage.
insidethevatican.com/
Peace!
F
Feanaro_s_Wife
Guest
I understand what you are saying with this… in fact, I thought of a similar comparison last night and was going to post it today, but thanks to you I didn’t have to, lol.
Let’s go deeper into your analogy.
Marriage (assuming that is was valid from the start) is permanent, just like baptism. So, no matter what kind of a spouse you are, you have the right to call yourself married.
So what if you are a spouse who chooses to ignore the “forsake all others” part of the deal? You are still married in the eyes of God and of the law.
But what kind of impression does it give to others if you go around saying in one sentence that you have a lover **and **are a good spouse??? Are we not to think this type of behavior is wrong and that this person has no idea what being married really means?
What if your spouse doesn’t mind that you also have another lover? Does that make it ok? Does that make it ok to call yourself a good spouse?
Now, the difference would be in attitude. Some spouses are bound to succumb to temptation and make mistakes. The other spouse is called to forgive if the offending spouse is truly repentant.
But what of the spouse who sees nothing wrong with committing adultery, and in fact claims that they aren’t because of some justification they have invented?
I think this is a valid comparison that is worth discussing.
On one hand you have a Catholic who is openly disobeying Church teachings and is proud of it and actually feels that they aren’t really wrong and who insists that they are a faithful Catholic.
On the other hand you have a spouse who is openly disobeying the marriage “laws” by committing adultery, is convinced that there is nothing wrong with this, and insists on saying that they are a good spouse.
I look forward to hearing your opinions on this.
Malia
L
Lux_et_veritas
Guest
None of us can take the Catholic out of a baptized Catholic under any circumstances. A dissenter or even an atheist who has left the church is still technically a Catholic.
However, a baptized Catholic can outwardly, or inwardly, take on a way of life that is more likened to Protestantism where each person forms their own conscience and does not require the Church to aid in development in that conscience.
Christ gave us this Church, the Papacy, and the Magisterium, to help us to grow in sanctity and to help us to form our conscience. He knew that if we all interpreted scripture in our own way, we would all be wandering in circles.
F
Feanaro_s_Wife
Guest
Feanaro's Wife:
Malia
Nobody? Come on, this is a good one…isn’t it?
Malia
B
Brad
Guest
John of Woking:
When you reject the moral teachings long enough, you will eventually refute doctrines of the faith in a justification of validating your moral beliefs.
B
Brad
Guest
I have seen numerous posts in which you lament someone claiming you are not a Catholic if you refuse a Chruch teaching AND where you imply that you refuse some of the Church teachings.
Help me out. Rather than lament, let’s speak of facts.
- Who is saying you are not a Catholic?
- What Church teachings do you refuse?
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I have limited computer access this evening, so I’ll try to be brief (at least by my standards lol).
The pope allegedly speaks of a “pruning” of the Church, looking toward a “leaner” but “more faithful” Church if we deal with all these cafeteria Catholics in the way they should be – shape up or ship out. Now I don’t know if that’s the new pope’s acftuall attitude, but if it’s just the more zealous “orthodox” on this board that is painting them this way.
A few week ago when the forum was down I actually read some of the tracts (very enjoyable) but one e-letter from Karl showed he, either satirically or for real (I dfon’t know hiim that well but it looked serious) endorsed the same attitude.
More important that the natural battle and/or fear people have of those with different beliefs, I am more interested in people who claim to follow Church teachings and ask that “heterodox” as they define them quit calling themselves Catholic. That drives me batty, because I just can’t see how someone can be that blind to make such claims, when they themselves, and AAA forum apologists, have all confirmed that is it not on wrong to call me non-Catholic, but leading me into sin to suggest that I do myself. Sometimes maybe I just obsess on watching this circular logic. Present company excepted, of course.
Many posters on this forum, and i don’t think they would be ashamed to identify themselve publicly here, consider me not a “true” catholic because I have not made a blanket agreement that I will accept and follow all Church teachings. I have targeted converts for special caution against this, as many of them know the Bible much better than cradles such as myself, and when they come in through RCIA they sign such an agreement that I haven’t. Therefore, being a non-assenting Catholic does not make me a hypocrite, but it’s hard for them to grasp that because if they were non-assenting they have that promise they signed. I’m here because I was baptized into the family. They were baptized, adopted, accepted, or what, and we have totally different ways of looking at things. Let us be fascinated and loving toward each other to share stories rather than challenge the other to live up to expectations we have of ourselves in a different situation.
Specifcally the big problam I have right now is with papal infallibility. I believe the pope reigns supreme over the Church, and I’m even willing to give him control over the yardstick of what is considered – if nothing else for sake of having a standard for discussion – moral.
I have a lot of baggage, some brought on myself and much of it I honestly to this day I believe is unjustified and am still trying to get over it. I tend also to speak up for people who I think wnat to say something but are afraid at what people will think. I listen to how “successful” people describe themselves, and for example Rush Limbaugh built an empire, spawned many wannabes, and rejuvenated AM radio just by saying things other people wish they could have said.
So there’s emotional issues in it for me.
What I want most is to help people, including myself, have discussions where the presumption is always that the other person is not speaking down but across. Societal programming and original sin have made that very difficult, as we all have tons of baggage loaded into practically any word in the English vocabulary, and people often respond in unpredictable ways.
Anyway I gottat get off the computer for a while. I hope I answered your question at least in part.
Papal infallibilty as in the whole thing about the keys and how that makes us infallible on faith and morals. In a nutshell that is my biggest probhlem. I have practical reasons other than theological, so there are many ways to approach this issue.
Alan
R
Ruthie
Guest
Malia, you expanded my idea nicely!
I’ve come to the conclusion that I shouldn’t say that someone is not a Catholic because they dissent. Just as a continual adulterer is still entitled to the title “spouse,” a dissenting Catholic is still a Catholic. In fact, the Church considers all her children Catholics until and unless they have formally defected. (How one formally defects is somewhat unclear.)
I like the term “Cafeteria Catholic,” because it runs off the tongue and the keyboard more easily than “selectively obedient Catholic.”
I do wish that the Church could do something to prevent the loudmouth dissenters from representing Catholics as a whole. But what can we do? it’s the media who give these people a soapbox, not the Church. And, of course, those folks would lose their media soapbox if they stopped claiming to be Catholics.
Alan, it might help your problem with Papal infallibility to search both the library, and the “Ask an Apologist” forum, for the subject and read what they say. HTH!
I’ve come to the conclusion that I shouldn’t say that someone is not a Catholic because they dissent. Just as a continual adulterer is still entitled to the title “spouse,” a dissenting Catholic is still a Catholic. In fact, the Church considers all her children Catholics until and unless they have formally defected. (How one formally defects is somewhat unclear.)
I like the term “Cafeteria Catholic,” because it runs off the tongue and the keyboard more easily than “selectively obedient Catholic.”
I do wish that the Church could do something to prevent the loudmouth dissenters from representing Catholics as a whole. But what can we do? it’s the media who give these people a soapbox, not the Church. And, of course, those folks would lose their media soapbox if they stopped claiming to be Catholics.
Alan, it might help your problem with Papal infallibility to search both the library, and the “Ask an Apologist” forum, for the subject and read what they say. HTH!
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Thank you. I like the way you wrote that.
Well yes, to the extent that the distinction is necessary at all. I suppose it could have some usefulness in apologetics, but I think it’s a powerfully loaded word that also causes heartache and divisive feelings that preclude meaningful dialog.
The technology is in place. The media no longer control international communications. We can stick strictly to our own channels for official information, and simply quit fighting the media, incorporating Christ’s suggestion to turn the other cheek.
As much as the media likes accusations, accusations alone are nothing compared to two-way battles. At some point if we do not retaliate or even answer, and especially if Catholics refuse to let stupid words upset and offend them so that they feel they have to speak publicly on the matter, then the media will get bored. They love to bash the Church, but if the Church doesnt’ fight back then it’s no fun anymore. Let them say what they want. We are not confused about our beliefs.
Thanks for the suggestion. I have quite a queue of suggested things to look up, so it may not be right away. Frankly, I’m more interested in being the self-appointed Attitude Police than getting into detail about doctrine!
Alan
F
Feanaro_s_Wife
Guest
Do you profess your faith during Mass? Isn’t that a blanket statement of what you believe?
It seems clear to me, from reading the CCC in depth, that when stating “I believe in the Holy Catholic Church”{apostle’s creed} that you are agreeing that she is guided by the Holy Spirit and believe in all she teaches her faithful.
Are you saying that a convert, who signs a paper attesting to his beliefs can then be a called a non-Catholic if he states he now doesn’t believe it all, but that you can’t because you didn’t sign anything? I am confused, yet again.
When you go up to receive Holy Communion, what do you see yourself in communion with?
And once again, I think you need to see the difference between doubting a teaching, and flat out disagreeing with it. You seem to be having some sincere issues with your faith, and to me, that does not make you a non-Catholic. It makes you seem pretty much like the rest of us.
When I think of the term cafeteria Catholic, I automatically think of someone who professes to be very faithful, but is pro-choice, or pro-gay marriage, or chooses to ignore other Church teachings because they are sure they know better…they are not simply doubting. They are actively working against the Church.
Malia
S
shannon_e
Guest
Alan,
FWIW, I think that converts would be far more understanding and compassionate to anyone having struggles with their faith.
Converts know all too well what it’s like to turn your life upside down, and to turn your soul inside out.
Peace
FWIW, I think that converts would be far more understanding and compassionate to anyone having struggles with their faith.
Converts know all too well what it’s like to turn your life upside down, and to turn your soul inside out.
Peace
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I’m sorry I don’t answer you directly more often. I do read your posts but I get all messed up in the font thing sometimes when I try to respond. I have a new way to try, because you pose some great questions, and I love a challenge. 
.
Feanaro's Wife:
So it is a statement that I have read for about 40 years. Some days it really impresses me, other days I’m distracted like I’m getting my music organized so I’ll be ready to play piano for the responsorial psalm.
Feanaro's Wife:
Protestants picked me up and nursed me with their flavor of the word, until I met my wife, a staunch Catholic, and together we are getting closer to the Church. (I feel like I was raised in the jungle by wolves. )
It is really only the last few months on this forum that I have any clue what I am “supposed” to believe. So with all the baggage I have with the Church, plus the sympathy and gratitude for protestants and other “low-lifes”
I came on here like gangbusters and now that I don’t feel like everybody’s putting me down and those who Cannot Speak For Themselves because they were similarly “oppressed” as I imagined myself, I can hopefully settle down too.
Feanaro's Wife:
IOW, I think converts may hold themselves to a higher standard, because they consented to it knowledgeably and as adults, and often already zealous about the Lord because otherwise they would have dropped out of their other faith rather than sought out Catholicism.
Cradle Catholics, by comparison, if they are over the age of 30 or so are mostly clueless. Catechism was nearly worthless, and in my mom’s era it was actually heretical in many cases. My mom spent her whole young life honestly believeing all her friends would inevitably wind up in hell.
Catechism has improved, I’m happy to say. My own kids (4 teenagers and 2 sub-teenagers) can run rings around me in theology, and have helped the school win prizes in religion bowl competition. My daughter wrote a research paper on the albegensian heresy in about sixth grade. I never heard ot eht word “heresy” in eight years of Catholic school. They were too busy feeeding up political correctness over racism and drug abuse, the big new fad to browbeat kids over in the 60s and 70s. My kids all had to learn the books of the Bible. Back in my day, that was one of the things that Protestant kids used as a weapon of how stupid we were about the Bible, which of course we never picked up. Now they do, even some in grade school Thank God.
(continued)
.Feanaro's Wife:
Excellent question. I’ve done it doggedly since I was a little kid, and can’t imagine behaving any other way in Mass. It is a habit, and sometimes I find myself speaking it phonetically. Other times it hits me deeply as I ponder what I’m actually saying. One thing that I kind of get distracted by is where we bow because He was made man by Mary, when I’m more tempted to bow when we talk about Him giving Himself on the cross for His friends.
So it is a statement that I have read for about 40 years. Some days it really impresses me, other days I’m distracted like I’m getting my music organized so I’ll be ready to play piano for the responsorial psalm.
Feanaro's Wife:
Again, I learned this many years before I even heard the word “pope.” They didn’t teach us much of anything except stories like Jonah and the Whale in grade school. I had no idea what I was saying, and as soon as I moved away from home to college I quit going entirely.
Protestants picked me up and nursed me with their flavor of the word, until I met my wife, a staunch Catholic, and together we are getting closer to the Church. (I feel like I was raised in the jungle by wolves.
)It is really only the last few months on this forum that I have any clue what I am “supposed” to believe. So with all the baggage I have with the Church, plus the sympathy and gratitude for protestants and other “low-lifes”
I came on here like gangbusters and now that I don’t feel like everybody’s putting me down and those who Cannot Speak For Themselves because they were similarly “oppressed” as I imagined myself, I can hopefully settle down too.Feanaro's Wife:
Well, that too is an excellent question. I didn’t say that, but technically the convert can be called a “hypocrite” whereas I may still be called “non-Catholic” just as incorrectly as he is, but just not a “hypocrite.”
IOW, I think converts may hold themselves to a higher standard, because they consented to it knowledgeably and as adults, and often already zealous about the Lord because otherwise they would have dropped out of their other faith rather than sought out Catholicism.
Cradle Catholics, by comparison, if they are over the age of 30 or so are mostly clueless. Catechism was nearly worthless, and in my mom’s era it was actually heretical in many cases. My mom spent her whole young life honestly believeing all her friends would inevitably wind up in hell.
Catechism has improved, I’m happy to say. My own kids (4 teenagers and 2 sub-teenagers) can run rings around me in theology, and have helped the school win prizes in religion bowl competition. My daughter wrote a research paper on the albegensian heresy in about sixth grade. I never heard ot eht word “heresy” in eight years of Catholic school. They were too busy feeeding up political correctness over racism and drug abuse, the big new fad to browbeat kids over in the 60s and 70s. My kids all had to learn the books of the Bible. Back in my day, that was one of the things that Protestant kids used as a weapon of how stupid we were about the Bible, which of course we never picked up. Now they do, even some in grade school Thank God.
(continued)
- Status