Can I still be catholic if i dont believe everything the church teaches?

[ZMystiCat]

Its a bad thing to believe in bible stories that make no rational sense because it breeds stupidity

How does it breed stupidity? And how are you defining “rational sense”?

and being servile makes a master-servant relationship rather than a genuine one with god

First, this doesn’t answer my question on how you define “slave”.

Second, you changed the subject from Church to God.

But since you brought it up: How would having a servile attitude towards God prevent it from being genuine? If anything, the only way we can experience a proper relationship with God is if we approach God with a humble, servile attitude. Not only does this properly mirror the humble, servile attitude Christ took when He came down (and comes down) to be with us, lacking such an attitude seriously brings into question whether you understand Who He is, who you are, and how you relate to Him.

Even within the Trinity, the Son has a servile attitude towards the Father. If the most loving, pure, genuine relationship there is has a servile element to it, I think a servile attitude won’t harm our relationship with God.

i don’t believe

Well, not believing in Noah’s Ark as a literal story is not a problem. What you’ve outlined here, though, is a problem.

 

[Adrian169]

I have disagreements with the church and the bible, being a slave is not being able to exercise your will freely without the permission of your master. If youre a hardcore catholic, you cant do as you please without the bishops or gods approval. Perhaps the trinity had a servile relationship, that doesn’t mean it should apply to us due to because the father has slayed millions of people for disobeying him even in the smallest extent. Believing in the bible without thinking about it breeds stupidity because then youd believe anything the church tells you without having thoughts about it, thats servile stupidity because you have the capacity to think about the teachings they tell you but you dont do it anyway because it would mean disobeying god if you dont do it. Rational means to make reasonal sense, in that case. Many of the church teachings dont make sense.

 

[KevinK]

KevinK:

It is what allows authoritarianism and horrible outcomes when people are obsequious.

By your own logic it is overeating, not eating that is bad. A poor analogy to compare eating to authoritarianism.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

I have disagreements with the church and the bible

It may be that you are falling into a common pitfall. You’re letting yourself be influenced by a zero sum mindset. And that’s a bad way to go about anything, much less something that you have a lot of misinformation about. I don’t know where your misinformation about what th Church teaches comes from, but you’re showing that you have some.

You may have some disagreement with a legitimate understanding of a particular Church teaching, but so far you haven’t made one known. Many people have such disagreements, and carry on as best they can.

 

[Dan_Defender]

Jesus mentioned Noah and the flood. So there is no doubt that it happened. The details however can be debated ad infinitum.

 

[Adrian169]

One church teaching i dont think makes sense is the eucharist. The priest says the prayers and the bread becomes a part of christ, while the bread still tastes and looks like bread. That aligns alot with superstition. Another thing i think is preposterous is the account of Fatima where a bishop mentions that a 7 year old went to hell for wearing makeup, i dont see righteousness in that account.

 

[Adrian169]

Just because jesus mentions the flood, doesn’t mean it happened. Theres no good proof of the flood anyhow

 

[Dan_Defender]

Jesus does not lie. Have a good day bye.

 

[humbleseeker]

One church teaching i dont think makes sense is the eucharist.

Why didn’t you start your thread with this statement if you want to know if you can still be Catholic if you don’t believe everything the church teaches? The source and summit of our Catholic faith is the Eucharist, the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord, Jesus Christ. So yes, you have to believe in transubstantiation if you desire to be a Catholic in good standing. This is a basic tenant of the faith. But I see you just joined 4 hours ago…

 

[Pattylt]

Adrian, I’m not Catholic or even Christian but a little advice…
In order to know if you agree or disagree with the Church and the Bible, you need to know and understand WHAT that is. You seem to have a very shallow understanding of Church teachings which is making you look rather…well, shallow!

If you really want to understand what the Church believes and teaches, perhaps talk to a Preist or enroll in RCIA classes. Just a suggestion.

 

[ZMystiCat]

slave is not being able to exercise your will freely without the permission of your master

OK then, your definition really isn’t entirely in line with how the term “slavery” is generally used. “Slavery”, as a system, means that the person is the property of another. A “slave” is the property in this system.

But even under your personal definition, I can’t see how you go from “servile” to “slave”. A servile attitude, by definition, is a willingness to serve another. If your definition of “slave” requires the loss of acting on one’s free will, then it is no longer in line with the servile attitude.

If youre a hardcore catholic, you cant do as you please without the bishops or gods approval.

Sure you can. Most matters never have to pass by a Bishop or priest, and even on those matters that do, you’re completely free to not go to them. Sure, a devout Catholic may not, but that’s because, by their free will, they’ve chosen to obey the Church. No one is removing their ability to act freely.

Believing in the bible without thinking about it breeds stupidity because then youd believe anything the church tells you without having thoughts about it

Wait a minute! Who said the people accepting what the Bible says don’t think about and question it? Sure, such people exist, but that’s not a given.

Rational means to make reasonal sense, in that case.

And what does “reasonal [typo?] sense” mean?

A poor analogy to compare eating to authoritarianism.

I’m not saying they’re the same. I’m saying that you’re logic is faulty because it breaks down when applied elsewhere.

 

[dougp]

Well … are you fireproof?