Catechism vs Scripture

[JRKH]

James,

1. Who has it right?
2. Does the Catholic Church, alone, hold the “Spirit led” answers in matters of faith and morals?
3. Does the fact that Protestant Churches are not all in agreement in matters of faith and morals, necessarily mean that no Protestant Church can hold the “Spirit led” truth in matters of faith and morals?
4. Are there Protestant Churches, in agreement with one another, that hold the “Spirit led” truth in matters of faith and morals?
5. Is the Catholic Church wrong and lacking any “Spirit led” truth in the matters of faith and morals?
6. Are all Protestant Churches wrong and lacking any “Spirit led” truth in the matters of faith and morals?
7. Do Protestant Churches, in agreement with one another–and in agree with the Catholic Church–on the matters of faith and morals, hold the “Spirit led” truth, along with the Catholic Church?
   I think question #7 is the most important to consider.

All of these questions are really asking really boil down to two things. Can Protestant Churches Hold Truth and Does the Catholic Church have a valid claim on Authority?

Perhaps it would help if I gave you a summary of my journey. It took a couple of complimentary paths. One relating to the Bible, another relating to the validity of the Church’s authority and finally a look at the fruits of each Church system.

First we must start with the acceptance of Christ, His life, death and resurrection.
So. If we accept Christ we need to ask some questions to arrive at a decision as to which church is correct.

First let’s deal with the Bible since that is a crux of teaching and the center of what we as Christians know of Jesus.

1. Do all Christians accept the Bible as the Word of God? - Yes
2. Do all Christian bibles have the same books in them? (the same canon) - No
3. Does it make sense that the “Holy Word of God “, used by Christians should have differing canons? - No
4. Then why the difference and which canon is correct? - This led me to an investigation of how the Bible as we use it today came about. The result was that the universally accepted Bible in the Catholic Church from around 400 AD to 1500 AD, 1100 years had 72 books in it. It was at the time of the Protestant Reformation that the reformers removed the seven OT books AND, it should be noted, Martin Luther wanted to toss several NT books as well.
   Upshot? The Catholic Church compiled the Bible as we use it today. We accept these books as The Word of God because of the Authority of the Catholic Church. The Protestant denominations, who place such high regard on The Bible” and declare, as it says in revelation, that not one word is to be changed, started out by changing The Bible.

Now – How to deal with the issue of who is right among the Churches.

1. Can the Holy Spirit inspire or teach conflicting doctrine? - No
2. Did Christ establish a community/Church? - Yes
3. Did Christ establish multiple independent Churches? - No (Christ says “Church”)
4. Did Christ give this Church Authority? - Yes (Mt 16:18-19 and Mt 18:15-19)
   Note that these are the only 2 places in the Gospels where the term Church is used.
5. Did Christ Promise to be with His Church, to not leave us orphans and to Send the Paraclete? - Yes
6. Did Christ leave us a Church to guide us, or did He leave us a book? - A Church

So – Based on the above, we can see that, Christ established a Single, Authoritative Church, that hell will not overcome, and has the authority to Bind and Loose. Since Christ cannot lie, it follows that His Church will be in continuous and visible existence and not fall into apostasy as some claim, but will persevere. (Which is not to say individuals, even high ranking ones, will not fall into apostasy.) She will also act authoritatively in matters of faith and morals. The only church that fits that description is the Catholic Church. That same Church acted authoritatively in selecting the Books to be included in the canon of the Bible.
Therefore the correct church, for correct teachings on faith and morals must be the Catholic Church.

Now let’s look at the “Fruits” of “Catholicism” and “Protestantism”.
Catholicism
Catholicism is built upon the Three legged stool of Scripture, Tradition (Oral teachings), and Magisterium (Teaching Office). Each is critical to the Fullness of Truth and unity.We can also add Apostolic Succession – That is we have teachings not only from the Apostles but from those who were taught by the apostles and so on.
Catholicism has been messy from the beginning having to work constantly to define doctrine, answer questions and fight those who would teach a different Gospel. However the Church places a huge emphasis on Unity. Christ has One Mind. There is One Truth. There has been and will continue to be discussion and argument within the Church. However, such problems are dealt with within the structure of the Spirit Guided Church and decisions reached prayerfully in unity and always with reference to the Holy Bible, as well as the many great writings of the Church fathers and Doctors. Once a decision is reached by the Church (always after much prayer, discussion and consultation) the faithful who might still disagree submit their will to the Will of Christ in The Church thus maintaining unity and fulfilling Christ’s command to “Tell it to The Church”, and reinforcing Paul’s teaching that it is The Church that is the “Pillar and Foundation of Truth”.

Protestantism
Protestantism in it’s most basic, submits that it is The Bible Alone, interpreted by the “Spirit Led individual”, that will lead one to Christ. However, in practice, it became quickly evident that there were different “spirit led” interpretations flying around. Even the Reformers themselves could not come to agreement and since none was willing to submit their own “Spirit Led” wills to the others for the sake of Truth and Unity, they each went their own way. Thus from the very beginning there were fractures in Protestanism. Is this a good foundation for building Truth upon?
The result of this is many – many different and conflicting “Bible Based, and Spirit Led” beliefs among protestants and no way to distill them into one unified whole. Even the Old and established Protestant Churches are finding themselves splitting apart because they have no authority to tell the schismatic that they are wrong.

So – The fruits of Catholicism is Doctrinal Unity built upon Scripture, Tradition, and Teaching Authority. The Fruits of Protestantism is doctrinal chaos built upon the individual right of self interpretation.

You shall know them by their Fruits.

That is my journey in a nutshell.

(Cont)

 

[JRKH]

(Cont from Above)

I believe that there are both Protestants and Catholics who are “led by the Spirit” in matters of faith and morals, and can therefore be in agreement.

I do not believe that all Protestants hold the “Spirit led Truth.”

In regards to this, we are mixing apples and oranges just a bit. Here you are talking about individuals whereas above we are talking about “Churches”. The individual’s journey in the search for Truth is just that, individual and can change with time and wisdom. The beliefs of “Churches” on the other hand should be recorded and preached. It is these Church Doctrines that we can discuss so I will stick to those.

I do not believe that the fact that Protestant Churches are not all in agreement in matters of faith and morals, necessarily means that no Protestant Church can hold the “Spirit led” truth in matters of faith and morals.

And the Catholic Church agrees with you. All Protestant Churches contain a part of The Truth. So does one settle for a church with part of the Truth or do you go for the Church with All of the Truth?

I welcome you comments,
Anna

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[allhers]

Very nice JRKH, I can see that the Holy Spirit definately was your guide and that you
sincerely were seeking the truth and found the fullness of His Truth, Jesus Himself~~that is really awesome!

I am so happy for you and you seem to be able to relate so well what those of us, who are cradle Catholics, and were taught well, have known all along. I always find it amazing how loving God is to all and that when one seeks Jesus, He reveals Himself to them.

You ought to go on Marcus’ show your own self. Welcome home~~~!!!

 

[JRKH]

Very nice JRKH, I can see that the Holy Spirit definately was your guide and that you
sincerely were seeking the truth and found the fullness of His Truth, Jesus Himself~~that is really awesome!

I am so happy for you and you seem to be able to relate so well what those of us, who are cradle Catholics, and were taught well, have known all along. I always find it amazing how loving God is to all and that when one seeks Jesus, He reveals Himself to them.

You ought to go on Marcus’ show your own self. Welcome home~~~!!!

Thank you for the above.
I too was a cradle catholic and have come to the realization that, even though we may be baptized at 2 weeks old and confirmed at 12 years old or so, it is often much later that we must make the serious commitment to our faith. In my case it required a long sojourn in sin. It is only by the efforts of those “little old ladies with the rosaries”, as Fr Corapi says, that I am not dead.
As for being able to relate things, I take no credit for this since I struggle mightily to get things down on paper. It is only by the Grace of God and the Guidance of the Holy Spirit that what I write makes any sense.

Peace
James

 

[allhers]

Thank you for the above.
I too was a cradle catholic and have come to the realization that, even though we may be baptized at 2 weeks old and confirmed at 12 years old or so, it is often much later that we must make the serious commitment to our faith. In my case it required a long sojourn in sin. It is only by the efforts of those “little old ladies with the rosaries”, as Fr Corapi says, that I am not dead.
As for being able to relate things, I take no credit for this since I struggle mightily to get things down on paper. It is only by the Grace of God and the Guidance of the Holy Spirit that what I write makes any sense.

Peace
James

Well, since I am now a Granny myself, I have become one of those little old ladies with the rosaries.

My grandmother and mother taught it to me and I knew it before I was three, I too wish I had just led a life of a Saint, but unfortunately am also a sinner, but by the grace of God, I will continue to persevere.

 

[nlm]

Alright, we’ll put aside for a minute that I really have trouble believing that you use to
be a Cathoilic, let alone a Monk, its just that when you say things like this:
“Bible of Jerusalem”. See, I think anybody who use to be a Catholic and a Monk no less would at least know that its called the Jerusalem Bible not the Bible of Jerusalem. But anyway…

Since you say you are a product of the 60’s and early 70’s, let me explain the Mass to you in the way it was explained to me, in the early 60’s (same time frame as you), okay?

First we said a prayer before Mass, we asked for forgivness, kind of like the man in the
Bible, “Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner.” We were told that we were entering heaven,- we were before the throne of God, the angels and Saints, the Blessed Mother and all who had gone on before us were there. Of course Jesus, remaining hidden from us, but still with us, in the tabernacle, for love of us, as He is with us still. The Church is the Church Triumphant (those in Heaven), The Church Suffering (those in Purgatory, awaiting their entry into heaven after their final purification, as nothing unclean shall enter heaven, and those in purgatory, although they had already confessed their sins, they still needed purified before entering into His presence, but one day they too will be in heaven for all eternity.) The Church Militant is us here on earth. One Church, we are all members of His Body, Heaven, Purgatory and us here on earth, still on the journey. Does any of this ring a bell?

…continued.

Let me begin by saying that for fellow Christians to constantly doubt the fact that I indeed WAS Catholic for over 50 years AND a monk is NOT very charitable to say the least.Why in the world would I lie? Anyway, let’s move on. The reason I referred to the Jerusalem Bible as the Bible of Jerusalem is this. It is also the reason I accidently misused the words interpretation and translation yesterday. My maternal language is not English but French. I went to french school all my life. I try very hard not to “sound french” when I am writing in English but at times, especially if I am not careful, I slip.In french that Bible is called," La Bible de Jerusalem". Now you see that my calling that Bible something other than Jerusalem Bible was not proof of my never having been Catholic nor a monk but a rather a linguistic error. As a matter a fact, the day I received the habit of a novice at the monastery, on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15th, I was given a copy of the Jerusalem Bible as a gift by my family.I had owned one prior to that but they felt I needed a new one.I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt, I have NEVER heard the mass explained that way.It is very beautiful I must admit and certainly leads one to much private meditation.I am refering to the content of your friend the priest’s book. By the way, we had two periods of private meditation each day at the monastery.I was a Trappist.You may never have heard of them but they REALLY do exist in the USA and Canada as well as in many other countries around the world. They ( we ) follow the Rule of Saint Benedict.
Have a good day. NLM

 

[Anna_Scott]

JRKH: I’ll make a few quick comments; and then continue the discussion about “authority” in another post. I think “authority” is a huge issue, and I don’t want to rush through it.

Anna,
Naturally our simple questions will quickly evolve into complex answers so I have split up my reply a bit. First I will give some direct answers to your questions, from a catholic perspective naturally, and then in my next post I want to share with you a bit of how I worked through these questions for myself.

True. Simply questions rarely turn out to be “simple.”

Before launching unto addressing the questions you posed, I want to recommend to you the program “The Journey Home” on EWTN. It’s on Monday nights at 8 pm, with repeats on Tuesdays 10 am and Wednesday 1 pm. Very often in the conversion stories that people tell on this program the issue of authority comes up as a major reason that people come home to the Catholic Church. Perhaps if you watch some of these shows it might help you answer your question about authority.

Thanks for the suggestion. Others have suggested EWTN, but, sadly, I do not have this channel in my cable package. I even checked again this morning.

no need to worry. Any victory would not be mine but the holy spirit. You have posed some wonderful questions below that i will try and answer in a way that is either dogmatic or offensive but rather provokes additional thought and reflection.

Regarding the “victory dance”; I was just trying to bring some humor into a very serious subject. :extrahappy: My “delivery” must be off.

 

[JRKH]

JRKH: I’ll make a few quick comments; and then continue the discussion about “authority” in another post. I think “authority” is a huge issue, and I don’t want to rush through it.

Understood. Take your time.

True. Simply questions rarely turn out to be “simple.”

Thanks for the suggestion. Others have suggested EWTN, but, sadly, I do not have this channel in my cable package. I even checked again this morning.

That is too bad. However you can also get it Online HERE.
And you can download episodes of the Journey Home HERE. In fact the one that was just on this week (the first one on the download page, is pretty good as relates the Bible and Authority and Church teaching. Plus the guest is a jolly fella.

Regarding the “victory dance”; I was just trying to bring some humor into a very serious subject. :extrahappy: My “delivery” must be off.

I figured it was intended as humor. Just wanted to make sure that you understood that I wasn’t going to “gloat” or anything.

Peace
James

 

[Anna_Scott]

Understood. Take your time.

That is too bad. However you can also get it Online HERE.

 

[allhers]

Let me begin by saying that for fellow Christians to constantly doubt the fact that I indeed WAS Catholic for over 50 years AND a monk is NOT very charitable to say the least.Why in the world would I lie? Anyway, let’s move on. The reason I referred to the Jerusalem Bible as the Bible of Jerusalem is this. It is also the reason I accidently misused the words interpretation and translation yesterday. My maternal language is not English but French. I went to french school all my life. I try very hard not to “sound french” when I am writing in English but at times, especially if I am not careful, I slip.In french that Bible is called," La Bible de Jerusalem". Now you see that my calling that Bible something other than Jerusalem Bible was not proof of my never having been Catholic nor a monk but a rather a linguistic error. As a matter a fact, the day I received the habit of a novice at the monastery, on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15th, I was given a copy of the Jerusalem Bible as a gift by my family.I had owned one prior to that but they felt I needed a new one.I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt, I have NEVER heard the mass explained that way.It is very beautiful I must admit and certainly leads one to much private meditation.I am refering to the content of your friend the priest’s book. By the way, we had two periods of private meditation each day at the monastery.I was a Trappist.You may never have heard of them but they REALLY do exist in the USA and Canada as well as in many other countries around the world. They ( we ) follow the Rule of Saint Benedict.
Have a good day. NLM

Yes, I have heard of the Trappist.

I even looked them up as I haven’t really looked into them in awhile, they seem very awesome and filled with the life of Christ. Very devoted to the Blessed Mother too, and
even you said you became a novice on the Feast of the Assumption…

So, did your day consist of prayer, spiritual reading and manual labour?

Did your work become prayer?

Did you have this attitude toward forgiveness – which is constant, and forgetful of wrongs.
“Not to let the sun go down on our anger”

Just wondering how one who lives their life for God and contemplates Him daily ends up not believing He isn’t present in the Eucharist is all. Very strange to me indeed. If your life
is suppose to be filled with prayer and spiritual reading, how did you end up like you did?

I understand how one falls away for a time, at times, I understand how one picks one self(by the grace of God)
back up and goes to Confession and I understand that we are all sinners and that but for the grace of God, we all deserve hell. But, I don’t understand how one ends up not a believer in His Real Presence, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity and then just walks away. I really don’t understand that.

What went wrong? Did you quit leading a Sacramental life? Help me to understand please. Were you praying the Rosary? Going to Adoration, contemplating, reading the Bible and how is it that you missed the Cathechism when I have had the “new” one for over 10 years now?

I found some about them on these sites:

This is a community of monastic women belonging to the Cistercian Order in Ireland.
glencairnabbey.org/home.html

Main French-speaking Trappist, Cistercian & Benedictine Homepage
abbayes.net

Here is a link to an order of contemplative monks living according to the Rule of
St. Benedict and the Constitutions of the Order of Cistercians of the Strict Observance,
more commonly known as Trappists.
geneseeabbey.org/

This link is for the Sisters known as Trappistines.
www6.mailordercentral.com/trappistinecandy/Aboutus.asp

 

[Anna_Scott]

Let me begin by saying that for fellow Christians to constantly doubt the fact that I indeed WAS Catholic for over 50 years AND a monk is NOT very charitable to say the least.Why in the world would I lie? Anyway, let’s move on. The reason I referred to the Jerusalem Bible as the Bible of Jerusalem is this. It is also the reason I accidently misused the words interpretation and translation yesterday. My maternal language is not English but French. I went to french school all my life.

I try very hard not to “sound french” when I am writing in English but at times, especially if I am not careful, I slip.In french that Bible is called," La Bible de Jerusalem". Now you see that my calling that Bible something other than Jerusalem Bible was not proof of my never having been Catholic nor a monk but a rather a linguistic error.

As a matter a fact, the day I received the habit of a novice at the monastery, on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15th, I was given a copy of the Jerusalem Bible as a gift by my family.I had owned one prior to that but they felt I needed a new one.

I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt, I have NEVER heard the mass explained that way.It is very beautiful I must admit and certainly leads one to much private meditation.I am refering to the content of your friend the priest’s book. By the way, we had two periods of private meditation each day at the monastery.I was a Trappist.You may never have heard of them but they REALLY do exist in the USA and Canada as well as in many other countries around the world. They ( we ) follow the Rule of Saint Benedict.
Have a good day. NLM

NLM:

I am really glad you took the time to explain your reason for calling the Jerusalem Bible, the Bible of Jerusalem (La Bible de Jérusalem.)

The fact that French is your first language does explain many words and expressions you have used in your posts.

Did you ever use La Bible du Semeur (traduction évangélique en français moderne, très agréable pour une première lecture) **or **Louis Segond 1910 (traduction protestante la plus répandue)?

To add a little humor, I will tell you that I took more than 12 credit hours of French in my second round of education. Over time, I visited nearly every Province in Canada. The first time I visited Québec City, I was anxious to use my French. Sadly, I couldn’t understand a word they were saying. I eventually met an artist I could understand. He was from Paris.

So, I would guess that you deal not only with English, as a second language; but also, with the different “dialects” and “nuances” of the French language.

I am following your posts. You bring an interesting perspective to the Forums.

May God Continue to Bless You,
Anna

 

[nlm]

NLM:

I am really glad you took the time to explain your reason for calling the Jerusalem Bible, the Bible of Jerusalem (La Bible de Jérusalem.)

The fact that French is your first language does explain many words and expressions you have used in your posts.

Did you ever use La Bible du Semeur (traduction évangélique en français moderne, très agréable pour une première lecture) **or **Louis Segond 1910 (traduction protestante la plus répandue)?

To add a little humor, I will tell you that I took more than 12 credit hours of French in my second round of education. Over time, I visited nearly every Province in Canada. The first time I visited Québec City, I was anxious to use my French. Sadly, I couldn’t understand a word they were saying. I eventually met an artist I could understand. He was from Paris.

So, I would guess that you deal not only with English, as a second language; but also, with the different “dialects” and “nuances” of the French language.

I am following your posts. You bring an interesting perspective to the Forums.

May God Continue to Bless You,
Anna

Hello Anna, Yes I felt it would be useful to explain my choice of words at times as it seems to be an issue for some. Yes, the difference in languages can at times make a real difference, especially when dealing with specific topics as we are doing in this forum. I want to thank you for those references. Interestingly, I had asked a friend about a month ago for the name of a good French Protestant Bible. We do have a few French speaking congregants at our church.There are times it would be helpful to have one as a reference.
Yes, Quebec French can be difficult to understand at times.Having visited France several years ago, I had the opportunity to experience their " brand"of French which I found difficult to understand, even more so than Quebec.Have a great day and God Bless. NLM

 

[JudieK]

OK- I took me several days and 80-some posts later to get to my answer. So much has transpired on this board since then… I’m not even sure anyone even cares about this anymore, but here goes…

NLM- I’m sorry it’s taken so long for me to get back to you. I’ve been incredibly busy at work and couldn’t find the time to work on my response that I wanted to on my lunch. Then, when I read that you had been Catholic 50 years, a religious brother at that, I figured that you probably already knew what I was going to say anyway. But I guess for the benefit of general knowledge, I will put it out there anyway.

What I wanted to say is that all church teaching is NOT considered infallible. The Church is our teacher and our guide, but there are levels (gradations) of Church teaching. The Holy Spirit promised to protect the Church from error in matters pertaining to our salvation, but that doesn’t mean that every word the Pope utters is infallible. Only rarely does a Pope speak “ex cathedra”- from the Chair of Peter- and make infallible proclamations. Most of the time his writings are him acting as our shepard and pastor… shining his unique insight onto the concerns of the day. Since each Pope lives in a unique period of history, it is good that each Pope speaks to what is going on in the world at that time.

*** To give credit where it is due, I am using the book “By What Authority?” by Richard Gaillardetz to get this information. This was a text I used in a class I took at Christ the King seminary in East Aurora, NY. Please consider this information as being from that text.

The first level of Church teaching (doctrine) is DOGMA. These are a priviledged set of teachings that communicate God’s saving message as revealed to us through Scripture and the Tradition of the Church. They concern the central aspects of our faith such as the Divinity of Christ and the bodily resurrection. Most are found in the Church’s creedal statements. These teachings have been declared infallibly and are irreversible in character. Even so, that does not mean that the Church, in its explaining these teachings to each new generation, cannot improve upon the way it articulates these central truths of our faith. The response of the faithful to these teachings is called an “assent of faith.” One’s membership in the Catholic Church would be called into question by the public and obstinate denial of dogma. Formal rejection of dogma is called “heresy.”

The next level of Church teaching is DEFINITIVE DOCTRINE. These are teachings that are not divinely revealed, but are necessary for safeguarding and expounding on divine revelation. These teachings are taught with the charism of infallibility, and as such are irreversible. These teaching define our faith… an example of this is the declaration of the canon of scripture. The response of a faithful Catholic to these teachings should be to “firmly accept and hold as true.”

The third level of Church teaching is AUTHORITATIVE DOCTRINE. These are teachings that are drawn from the wisdom of the Church as it reflects on Scripture and Tradition, and are to guide the faith of believers. Many moral teachings fall into this category. These teachings do not DEFINE the Catholic faith, but enlighten and apply it to everyday situations. Prohibitions against in vitro fertilization and just war policies fall into this category. These are not declared infallibly, but authoritatively, which means that the faithful should give “a religious docility of will and intellect” to the teaching, making a genuine effort to assimillate the teaching into their personal religious convictions.

The final level of Church teaching is called PRUDENTIAL ADMONITIONS AND CHURCH DISCIPLINE. These are concrete applications of the faith applied to everyday life… bishops giving their ideas about how to live the faith, etc. These are NOT infallible or unchangeable, but exist for the church in a particular time or place. Church disciplines (such as fasting on Fridays in Lent, etc.) can and do change when the Church decides. Priestly celibacy is a Church discipline, not a doctrine. Believers are called to accept disciplines of the Church as the “here and now” way in which the Church operates, and to abide by them, even if they don’t agree with them in theory.

************ END OF USE OF TEXT REFERENCES************************

Most Papal pronouncements fall under the fourth level of teaching. I am not sure where the “Limbo” idea falls (I am sure Catholic Answers has an article in the archives about it… give it a look…) But one thing I learned in seminary is this: The Church exists in the human world and in real time. It is not a relic, nor a museum piece. As knowledge is gained in the sciences and technology, the Church must ponder these advances and use all knowledge available to define it’s beliefs. God, after all, is the author of the Universe, and all it’s laws and wonders. Such things do not negate our faith, but enlighten it, and fill us with even more wonder for the awesomeness of God!!! The Church, like humanity, spirals through time, gaining insight and wisdom as it goes. So it should not surprise anyone that later Popes, after reflecting and praying on all that has come before, ion light of what we know now, should nuance or give new perspectives on older teachings. It is not a negation of the teaching, but a nuanced view of it… a shining of new light on an old truth. And I see no problem with that at all. It only makes sense. Reading the Bible and taking each word as literally true without taking into account the historical time frame, limited knowledge of the cosmos of the authors, etc., just doesn’t make sense to me. God gave them all the truths needed for our salvation (which is why everything in the Bible is TRUE, but perhaps not FACTUAL), but they are packaged in the scientific limitations and literary styles of the day. We can understand that now, without negating the TRUTH that the Bible contains exactly what God wants us to know for our salvation.

Anna- I do believe that others besides Catholics have grace working in them, and God wills the salvation of all. It is up to Him alone to judge the souls of men, and to be sure He will be a merciful and loving father to all his children.

As far as the “denomination” debate… the Church does not consider itself a denomination, but the world does, in it’s way of categorizing things. I see it this way: the Catholic Church (along with the Orthodox Church, I suppose) is THE TREE. Other Christian churches are branches… feeding off the roots of the TREE but growing in different directions. They retain some characteristics of the tree, but are not the TREE. Just my view…

Peace to all… Judie

 

[Anna_Scott]

Yes, I have heard of the Trappist.

I even looked them up as I haven’t really looked into them in awhile, they seem very awesome and filled with the life of Christ. Very devoted to the Blessed Mother too, and
even you said you became a novice on the Feast of the Assumption…

So, did your day consist of prayer, spiritual reading and manual labour?

Did your work become prayer?

Did you have this attitude toward forgiveness – which is constant, and forgetful of wrongs.
“Not to let the sun go down on our anger”

Just wondering how one who lives their life for God and contemplates Him daily ends up not believing He isn’t present in the Eucharist is all. Very strange to me indeed. If your life
is suppose to be filled with prayer and spiritual reading, how did you end up like you did?

I understand how one falls away for a time, at times, I understand how one picks one self(by the grace of God)
back up and goes to Confession and I understand that we are all sinners and that but for the grace of God, we all deserve hell. But, I don’t understand how one ends up not a believer in His Real Presence, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity and then just walks away. I really don’t understand that.

What went wrong? Did you quit leading a Sacramental life? Help me to understand please. Were you praying the Rosary? Going to Adoration, contemplating, reading the Bible and how is it that you missed the Cathechism when I have had the “new” one for over 10 years now?

I found some about them on these sites:

This is a community of monastic women belonging to the Cistercian Order in Ireland.
glencairnabbey.org/home.html

Main French-speaking Trappist, Cistercian & Benedictine Homepage
abbayes.net

Here is a link to an order of contemplative monks living according to the Rule of
St. Benedict and the Constitutions of the Order of Cistercians of the Strict Observance,
more commonly known as Trappists.
geneseeabbey.org/

This link is for the Sisters known as Trappistines.
www6.mailordercentral.com/trappistinecandy/Aboutus.asp

allhers: I have been following the posts between Catholic Forum Members and NLM, a Catholic who converted to a Protestant affiliation. For me as a Christian in the Protestant sector, I find this dialogue very interesting. I have posted a few comments on this already.

I can tell by your post, that you are genuinely concerned about NLM, and that is a good thing to see. Instead of accusing him of never being a Catholic, or insulting his decision; you are compassionately asking him, “What went wrong?” This is a response that reveals the Love of Christ.

NLM’s issue, aside; I know that Catholics on this forum have encountered every kind of Protestant. I have witnessed only a small hint of what you encounter. Some Protestants hit the Forums with “guns blazing” like JesusOnlyWay (God help him-he was banned after 4 posts); others try to convince you that you are wrong and they are right–and that is clearly their only motive. Sometimes, I want to cringe, when I see what Protestants say to Catholics. Honestly, I really do not know how you tolerate us.

There is, however, another group of Protestants–like me–who are looking for God’s truth. Even though we may disagree or argue passionately for or against a certain belief; every word of those who reply, regardless of religious affiliation, is a type of witness. I am realizing, in my short time on the Forums, that all of us are some type of witness to one another.

I am drawn to those who show compassion and love. Subsequently, I am more likely to consider the beliefs that produce these “noticeable fruits” of the Spirit.

I will admit that I have posted words that were less than kind, less than compassionate. I can be argumentative; and, God forgive me, there have been times when my anger gets the best of me–spilling over in my comments. You can search my posts and find all of these reactions. It took me awhile to realize the impact of my words.

So, I’m not expecting perfection, nor am I passing judgment–I have committed more than my share of sins. I’m sure my former husband could fill you in on my flaws.

I am simply saying that love gets my attention. I think most of us are wired that way.

I am working on a response to JRKH, who has very generously responded to my questions. I want to give him a reply that is respectful of that generosity–JRKH, I will eventually finish and post it.

So, allhers, this is the long way of saying that your post to NLM is a positive witness to me. You are a witness to the love of Christ.

May God Continue to Bless You,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

OK- I took me several days and 80-some posts later to get to my answer. So much has transpired on this board since then… I’m not even sure anyone even cares about this anymore, but here goes…

NLM- I’m sorry it’s taken so long for me to get back to you. I’ve been incredibly busy at work and couldn’t find the time to work on my response that I wanted to on my lunch. Then, when I read that you had been Catholic 50 years, a religious brother at that, I figured that you probably already knew what I was going to say anyway. But I guess for the benefit of general knowledge, I will put it out there anyway. . . .
Peace to all… Judie

Judie:
I just found your post after I submitted my Post #166. I am so happy to hear from you again!

NLM may already know the elements of this post, but I did not. So, all this information is very helpful to me in understanding the Catholic Church and the issue of authority, which I am discussing with JRKH (still working on my post to him.)

I can see that you spent so much time on this. Thank you, thank you!

I will read this more than once, and will ponder your words.

Anna

 

[JRKH]

OK- I took me several days and 80-some posts later to get to my answer. So much has transpired on this board since then… I’m not even sure anyone even cares about this anymore, but here goes…

NLM- I’m sorry it’s taken so long for me to get back to you. I’ve been incredibly busy at work and couldn’t find the time to work on my response that I wanted to on my lunch. Then, when I read that you had been Catholic 50 years, a religious brother at that, I figured that you probably already knew what I was going to say anyway. But I guess for the benefit of general knowledge, I will put it out there anyway.

(Snip)

Peace to all… Judie

I will add my thanks to that of Anna. A most informative post.
A question if I might. Is there a way or place online that defines the level of the vatious teachings in the Church? For instance, when reading the Catachism is there a way to know if a passage is “Dogma” or “Authoritative Doctrine”?

Peace
James

 

[JudieK]

James- that is an excellent question, and one I would like to know the answer to myself. But one way to truly understand how the Church defines itself today, in light of the world we live in, is to read the 16 basic documents of the Vatican Council II (available all together in a cheap paperback text). I know so many Catholics find Vatican 2 controversial, but it did exactly what I said in my earlier post… it didn’t NEGATE the older teachings, but restated them in a nuanced way… realizing that God is merciful and loving first and foremost. V2 restated everything the Church is and believes in 16 documents that took YEARS and much careful, tedious debate with the best minds in the world (Catholic AND non) working on them, wrangling over ever word. And you’ll notice that the teachings are not equal in weight… they are categorized by their centricity to the faith. What does this mean? Well, most important are the four CONSTITUTIONS- two of which are DOGMATIC CONSTITUTIONS. I would imagine that the 2 Dogmatic Constitutions contain all the dogma of the Chuch. The other 2 Constitutions (what MAKES UP our Catholic Faith) I would imagine contain DEFINITIVE DOCTRINE. Then there are DECREES, which I would imagine are AUTHORITATIVE DOCTRINE. And then there are DECLARATIONS, which I think must fall into PRUDENTIAL CHURCH TEACHINGS and DISCIPLINES. I could be wrong here, but it makes sense to me. (There may be some crossing over… the Decree on the Training of Priests, for example, doesn’t seem doctrinal, but more about Church affairs. ) Surprisingly, these documents are quite user-friendly and easy to read… intentionally so, as they were written for everyone. Here is the list of the 16 V2 documents:

1. Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium)
2. Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum)
3. Constitution on Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium)
4. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes)
5. Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church (Christus Dominus)
6. Decree on the Ministy and Life of Priests (Presbyterorum Ordinis)
7. Decree on the training of Priests (Optatam Totius)
8. Decree on the Up-to-Date Renewal of Religious Life (Perfectae Caritatis)
9. Decree on the Apostolate of Lay People (Apostolicam Actuositatem)
   10.Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity (Ad Gentes Divinitus)
   11.Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio)
   12.Decree on the Catholic Eastern Churches (Orientalium Ecclesiarum)
   13.Decree on the Mass Media (Inter Mirifica)
   14.Declaration on Religious Liberty (Dignitatus Humanae)
   15.Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions (Nostra Aetate)
   16.Declaration on Christian Education (Gravissimum Educationis)

 

[JudieK]

So… just to summarize… if anyone really wants to know what the Catholic Church is and believes NOW… having had 2000 years to reflect on the mysteries of the faith and the progress of humanity, the sciences, etc., take some time even if just to read the 4 Constitions. They are truly wonderful documents and NOT difficult. The Catechism, of course, is a wonderful tool as well, but arranged more like a reference book. This reads more like poetry to me… beautiful and complete. I think that before anyone criticizes or attacks the Catholic Church, these Constitutions should be required reading. Understanding is the first step to peace.

 

[allhers]

Thank you for your kind words Anna, I cry when I read posts like nlm’s. It honestly hurts me and makes me want to help fix what so obviously went wrong.

I’m glad you understand and I sincerely pray that nlm does too. You are in good hands here, the people that are answering you are giving you great information. I am sorry that I got focused on nlm and wasn’t more helpful to you.

I just keep thinking of Jesus on that hillside, reaching out to the one lost sheep, I saw
a painting once, where Jesus was surrounded by a bush that had thorns on it, He was on the side of a steep hill and He reached His hand through that thorn bush and stretched His arm out as far as He could and extended His hand to the one that was lost.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Thank you for your kind words Anna, I cry when I read posts like nlm’s. It honestly hurts me and makes me want to help fix what so obviously went wrong.

I’m glad you understand and I sincerely pray that nlm does too. You are in good hands here, the people that are answering you are giving you great information. I am sorry that I got focused on nlm and wasn’t more helpful to you.

I just keep thinking of Jesus on that hillside, reaching out to the one lost sheep, I saw
a painting once, where Jesus was surrounded by a bush that had thorns on it, He was on the side of a steep hill and He reached His hand through that thorn bush and stretched His arm out as far as He could and extended His hand to the one that was lost.

Allhers: You did help me, by demonstrating your love and concern for NLM. As a Protestant Christian, I needed to see that NLM is still cherished by Catholic Christians.

NLM does sound happy and at peace where he is. However, he must go where ever God leads him.

NLM, you are part of this Forum, and I am talking about you, instead of to you. Please forgive me for that.

Anna