Dare I Ask?

[Sirach2]

If I were a non-Catholic reading this, I can guarantee I would run, not walk, as far away from Catholics as I could get!

Originally Posted by PJM forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
***WHAT’S YOU’RE EXCUSE FOR NOT BEING CATHOLIC? ***

 

[Reuben_J]

If I were a non-Catholic reading this, I can guarantee I would run, not walk, as far away from Catholics as I could get!

Originally Posted by PJM forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
***WHAT’S YOU’RE EXCUSE FOR NOT BEING CATHOLIC? ***

My friend, It’s more of a rhetoric to solicit discussion rather than literal. It is a personal style of opening a post as Original Post. The OP apologizes for Catholicism but he is fair in his discussion.

 

[Sirach2]

My friend, It’s more of a rhetoric to solicit discussion rather than literal. It is a personal style of opening a post as Original Post

I have no desire to go further than these few “rhetorical” opening words …
but it seems clear that I was not the only one offended.
OP:

And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican"

But I [JESUS] say unto you, that none of those men that were invited, shall taste of my supper"

Matthew 7:14 “How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!”

:twocents:

 

[Reuben_J]

I have no desire to go further than these few “rhetorical” opening words …
but it seems clear that I was not the only one offended.

:twocents:

I just feel compel to reply and that’s not because I want to argue.

He is quoting the Bible, rightly or wrongly. Any full blooded non-Catholics who feel compelled enough to reply, even if it is for clarification, will reply, and I believe that serves the purpose of the OP.

We are often faced with statements like “Catholics pray to Mary” or “Catholics keep statues, therefore they worship statue”. I would see that as opportunity to explain my faith and to give correction to the incorrect inference.

I am just saying … . Yes, one can be offended but I am sure that there are others who would see beyond that.

 

[Sirach2]

I just feel compel to reply and that’s not because I want to argue.

He is quoting the Bible, rightly or wrongly.

You have your opinion – I have mine. Let’s keep it there. I would be hard pressed to think you are not trying to argue your point. Two posts already?

BTW, the op is female, and I am familiar with her challenges.

 

[Nine_Two]

I just feel compel to reply and that’s not because I want to argue.

He is quoting the Bible, rightly or wrongly. Any full blooded non-Catholics who feel compelled enough to reply, even if it is for clarification, will reply, and I believe that serves the purpose of the OP.

We are often faced with statements like “Catholics pray to Mary” or “Catholics keep statues, therefore they worship statue”. I would see that as opportunity to explain my faith and to give correction to the incorrect inference.

I am just saying … . Yes, one can be offended but I am sure that there are others who would see beyond that.

Putting disparate verses together, and interjecting words to lead to a specific conclusion is more than simple quotation.
I’m not arguing it invalidates the point or anything, just that more is going on than a quotation.

 

[Sirach2]

If anyone has read sections of her blog, there can be no doubt about her interior stand on this, and all doubt about this being an unhealthy challenge to non-C’s will fly.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I was Catholic - and I was a very active one too: Mass Coordinator, 3rd degree Knight of Columbus, and President of my college’s Newman Club. I also had a spiritual director and, for two years, was actively discerning a vocation to the priesthood.

There are many godly and amazing things about the Catholic Church. However, I simply do not agree with the legalistic, codified understanding of the faith which the Catechism teaches - I believe it is incomplete and detrimental. But nevertheless, since the Catechism is essentially the “operating manual” of the Catholic Church, I had trouble understanding Catholicism by extension.

When I mean legalistic and codified, here are some examples. One of the three Church Hierarchs, St. John Chrysostom, said that a man - “even if he stands at the summit of virtue” - is still only saved by God’s mercy alone. Today, the Catechism makes the distinction between dying in mortal sin and dying in a “state of grace” (which is defined as dying in communion with the Church without the spiritual stain of “mortal sin” [which is defined as a willingly committed “grave act” [which is defined as … you get my point]]). These distinctions did not exist in the early Church and still do not exist in Orthodoxy. Indeed, they turn a religion into a legal transaction with God rather than a living and breathing relationship with Him.

This spirit of legalism and the constant urge to define the faith is pervasive in all aspects of Catholic theology. Catholicism is so well defined that it even contradicts itself in some places. For example: The Catholic Church ruled that Anglican orders were invalid because the “Edwardine Ordinal did not have any language referring to the sacrificial role of the priest.” At the same time, though, none of the ordination rites of the Eastern Orthodox Churches use such language, and Rome recognized their orders as valid.

While I was at odds with the Catechism’s approach, I fell in love with how the Eastern Orthodox church has always understood matters of faith. Instead of a legal model, the Orthodox church uses a medical one - meaning that sins are not addressed as crimes that deserve punishments, but illnesses that need healing. The amount of mercy I first perceived in entering an Orthodox Church was outstanding. Furthermore, no Catechism or strict doctrinal text exists in the Orthodox Church, and the mysteries of the faith are left as mysteries. Orthodoxy is not big on defining every matter of faith or listing rules -** it can be just as much a sin to go to Church if you’re going for the wrong reason** (for example: going to Church just so other people can think that you’re pious - the Orthodox would say it’s better to stay home on Sunday). It is a whole faith to foster a personal relationship, considering the whole being of a person, not a flat list of obligations that one is expected to follow.

SOLD!

Beam me up Scottie!

 

[PJM]

=(name removed by moderator);9989657]It is then your contention that everyone who is not member of the Church and in communion with Rome and us is simply making excuses? That seems a rather odd proposition at best.

No dear freind;

But truth is SINGULAR.

It is biblical and historical fact that Christ completed what he intended.

One Church, Just One set of Faith beliefs and One God.

While God permits other views; that is NO indication that he either desires or approves of them. AMEN

Schism IS seperation from.
God Bless,
Pat

 

[PJM]

=Taurks;

EXCELLENT POST; BUT A BIT LENGTHY FOR ROOM TO REPLY

John.10: 16 “And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd”

There are many godly and amazing things about the Catholic Church. However, I simply do not agree with the legalistic, codified understanding of the faith which the Catechism teaches

When I mean legalistic and codified, here are some examples. One of the three Church Hierarchs, St. John Chrysostom, said that a man - “even if he stands at the summit of virtue” - is still only saved by God’s mercy alone. Today, the Catechism makes the distinction between dying in mortal sin and dying in a “state of grace” … which is defined as dying in communion with the Church without the spiritual stain of “mortal sin” [which is defined as a willingly committed "grave act… These distinctions did not exist in the early Church and still do not exist in Orthodoxy

Read 1ST. Jn.5:16-17 and John 20:19-23.
Remember the Church is a “Living [growing church” and that by necessity explains “the Key’s to heaven to Peter [Mt. 16:19] and the passing on Christ own Powers to ALL of the Apostles and through them the CC by absolute necessity with the COMMAND of Mt. 28:19-20. This power transfer is indicated at least three times: Mt. 28:16-20; Jn. 17:15-19, and again in Jn. 20:19-23 “As the father sent Me; so TO I God send you.”]

This spirit of legalism and the constant urge to define the faith is pervasive in all aspects of Catholic theology. Catholicism is so well defined that it even contradicts itself in some places. For example: The Catholic Church ruled that Anglican orders were invalid because the “Edwardine Ordinal did not have any language referring to the sacrificial role of the priest.” At the same time, though, none of the ordination rites of the Eastern Orthodox Churches use such language, and Rome recognized their orders as valid.

WHY? Because Henry’s separation and development of an alternative mandated religion
Caused not only a schism; BUT a LOSS OF DIRECT Apostolic Succession. Orthodox hold valid Apostolic Succession; validly, BUT NOT Licitly. Not as Christ Ordained.

While I was at odds with the Catechism’s approach, I fell in love with how the Eastern Orthodox church has always understood matters of faith. Instead of a legal model, the Orthodox church uses a medical one - meaning that sins are not addressed as crimes that deserve punishments, but illnesses that need healing?QUOTE]

Nice and friendly; BUT NOT Godly or Biblical/ Even in the OT times God used priest for what He [our Creator] DEMANDED. Lev.4:20;26;31 & 16: 8-9 & Num.15: 25-28. This in completed, perfected and empowered to the Catholic Priesthood in John 20:19-23

The amount of mercy I first perceived in entering an Orthodox Church was outstanding

Mercy can ONLY come From God; Like Grace it’s His exclusive DOMAIN

Furthermore, no Catechism or strict doctrinal text exists in the Orthodox Church, and the mysteries of the faith are left as mysteries

And why is that a “good thing”. Nice; yes. Effective? God’s Will: NO!

Orthodoxy is not big on defining every matter of faith or listing rules - it can be just as much a sin to go to Church if you’re going for the wrong reason (for example: going to Church just so other people can think that you’re pious - the Orthodox would say it’s better to stay home on Sunday)

So God’s Commandment: KEEP HOLY the Sabbath Day is only a suggestion? Christ created a “Church” so one can choose to stay home? NO! Both actions are GRAVELY sinful. 1st. Jn. 5: 16-17… Exo. 20:8; Duet. 5:15

It is a whole faith to foster a personal relationship, considering the whole being of a person, not a flat list of obligations that one is expected to follow

While God permits ones OWN opinions; there is NO indication that He accepts them; approves of them or will not hold them in judgment upon death.

Only and always: One God; His singular Faith-teachings, and One church. Amen.
THANKS and Gods Blessings,
[/quote]

 

[PJM]

=seeker57;9991477]“WHAT’S YOU’RE EXCUSE FOR NOT BEING CATHOLIC?”

Why would I need an excuse?

I am a Unitarian Universalist, who is quite happy with his faith, its teachings and traditions.

Oh, and since unitarianism, by its very definition, denies the existence of a trinity, that would made adhering to Catholic beliefs impossible.

Peace,

Seeker

I’m sure god is happy that your “happy.”

BUT friend: Being “happy” is NOT “TRUTH” and is NOT Obedience to what God permits, Commnads and Demands.

Being “happy” WILL NOT get anyone to heaven."

Being Informed and Obedinet MIGHT [conditionally]

God Bless you,

 

[Sirach2]

No doubt about it, Jharek. The OP is engaging in agenda posting! And it IS offensive.

 

[PJM]

SophiaK

I don’t feel like I have excuses. I enjoy conversation with Roman Catholics and want nothing but to get along, but I’m happy with where I stand on things

BUT: your position denies 1. God’s own Teaching 2. The Bible 3. Historical facts 4. While personal opinion is allowed by God; there is NO indication whatsoever that God approves, tolerates or accepts it… All leading to the Judgment:

**Heb.6: 10 **“For God is not so unjust as to overlook your work and the love which you showed for his sake in serving the saints, as you still do.”

**Rev.2: 23 **“and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches shall know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve.”

**1 Peter 1: 17 **“Now if you invoke as Father him who judges impartially according to each one’s works, conduct yourselves with reverence during the time of your sojourning, “

I reject Papal Infallibility

READ Mt. 16:15-19; mt. 28:19-20; Jn. 17: 18-19 and Jn.20:19-23… NOTE the 3 times Christ passes on His Own Powers and Authority to Peter and through HIM; the other Apostles

Then Read Jn.14: 16-17; FULLFILLED in Jn. 20:21-22. Then if you want more let me know.

I reject the doctrine of breaking away from the Roman Catholic Church as heresy, because

In doing so you choose to deny both the Bible and Christ.

John.10: 16 “And I [Jesus] have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice.** So there shall be one flock, one shepherd” **

Eph. 4: 1-7 “…eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body [WHICH MEANS ONE CHURCH] and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, [Meaning only One set of beliefs] one baptism, one God and Father of us all"

I reject the doctrine that the Roman Catholic Church and churches in full communion with it are the Only Church

And U do so at GREAT peril to your soul! Which given the space I can verify and prove.

I reject the doctrine of women being ineligible for priesthood

Adam was CREATED before Eve; and Eve FROM Adam
Every Old Testament leader chosen by Yahweh is MALE
Christ is Male
Each of the **12 Apostles **is Male by God;s choice

Obviously a Perfect God has reasons. The “husband” is the head of the wife and family
Eph. 5:22-28

I reject the doctrine of children not old enough to complete catechism being barred from the Eucharist

This I assume because you do NOT accept the Eucharist as God. One would profane God by accepting this GIFT and not comprehending it and being truly GRATEFUL for it

I am comfortable with ideological differences amongst Christians, even when I flat out think someone is wrong. I enjoy having the freedom to read the Bible, come to conclusions on my own, and to allow my views to change as I develop

You are; God’s not!

Deut.4: 2 “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it; that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. … Prov30:5 Every word of God is tested; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Add nothing to his words, lest he reprimand you, and you be proved a liar. [FRIEND if you do not understand this let me know]

Mark 7:13 “Making void the word of God by your own tradition, which you have given forth. And many other such like things you do.”

Luke 4:4 “And Jesus answered him: It is written, that Man liveth not by bread alone, but by every word of God.”

Matt. 10:1-8 “And he [God] called to him his twelve apostles and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity. The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter,

Acts.20: 28 “Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God [SINGULAR] which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.”

**Romans 13: 2 **“Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”

My dear friend; if your serious about getting to heaven which can ONLY be accomplished God’s way; you ought to do much praying and give careful thought to the inner voice. At this point your ego is far greater than your right understanding.

God Bless you.
Pat /PJM

 

[PJM]

=jrtrent;9992469]Much has already been said about doctrinal differences, competing church’s claims to be the One Church authorized by Christ, and so on. I’ll only add a brief quote from Archbishop Haverland (of the Anglican Catholic Church) on the issue of Anglicans seeking union with the Roman Catholic church:

“We believe that classical Anglicanism, as presented clearly in The Affirmation of Saint Louis and in our liturgies and other authoritative formularies, is already faithful to Scripture and the Fathers and is already fully Catholic and Orthodox. Conversion is not necessary and absorption is not appropriate.” virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/print.php?storyid=11534

That’s NICE BUT it’s not

1. Biblical
2. God’s Own Will
3. Authoritive. The KEYS to heaven were ONLY Given to Peter and through him todays CC by absolute authority [Mt. 28:19-20] can ONLY be accomplished in this manner.

**John.10: 16 “And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd” **

Acts.20: 28 “Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God [SINGULAR] which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.”

**Romans 13: 2 **“Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”

God Bless,
Pat/PJM

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

**Please observe Forum conduct rule #6.

Catholics must be charitable in their discussions about non-Catholic belief and practice. **