G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
Because they don’t reject purgatory per se, they belive the soul needs to be purified before entering Heaven. Protestants don’t belive purification is needed or necessary.
- Status
L
lurdes
Guest
are you a Catholic???
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
He says he is. I think he’s just seeing how badly he can push other catholic’s buttons
P
peary
Guest
**Did you read my answer to you? In effect, the Orthodox have a different way of explaining it, but they do not necessarily discount that souls may need a period of purification after death prior to entry into Heaven. It’s just not stated as bluntly as in the West. And the Orthodox will not ‘deny’ a purification after death. It is just not a developed doctrine to the point as to where the western Church defined it.
NonCatholic ecclesial communities might be heretical on this point because they have rejected Christ’s Church. However, since Vatican II the Catholic Church has basically looked upon the matter as their not having the fullness of Faith, rather than anything heretical, or no faith at all.**
L
lurdes
Guest
well he doesn’t sound like a true Catholic but I wanted to make sure.He says he is. I think he’s just seeing how badly he can push other catholic’s buttons
G
Goth_Catholic
Guest
I know.
B
bobzills
Guest
This is off topic. The topic, as I understand it to be, is whether or not there are differences between Catholic teaching and the teaching of the Bible,. not what my personal religion is? My understanding of the rules of CAF is that posters are supposed to remain on the topic of the thread and not to discuss unrelated personal issues.
I have quoted the good Catholic Father Kunkel here, in support of my understanding of the Scriptures that women are not to wear pants. Why is this not contrary to the current Catholic teaching that it is OK for women to wear pants ? Why is it wrong for me to cite the Catholic priest Father Kunkel. Instead of these personal comments directed against me, why don;t people follow the rules of CAF and simply try to answer the question as it is posed?
Further, the Bible says that women are to wear headcovering in Church. However, this is a big difference with the present Catholic teaching which says that it is not required.
B
bobzills
Guest
Here is another difference between Catholic teaching and the Bible:
According to Catholic teaching if, with full knowledge and consent, you eat a hot dog on a Friday of Lent, or a day of abstinence, you have committed a mortal sin and if unrepented you will go to hell. So the hot dog which has entered into your mouth has defiled you and prepared you for your eternal damnation. On the other hand, there is no condemnation of the novels of Father Greeley, where the characters have all kinds of swearing and cursing coming out of their mouths. Father Greeley is a priest in good standing in the Catholic Church and has been praised by Church leaders, such as for example, Cardinal Mahony. So this is a difference between Catholic teaching and the teaching of the Bible which says:
“Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man: but what cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.”
or in the basic English version:
" Not that which goes into the mouth makes a man unclean, but that which comes out of the mouth."
Matthew 15:11.
According to Catholic teaching if, with full knowledge and consent, you eat a hot dog on a Friday of Lent, or a day of abstinence, you have committed a mortal sin and if unrepented you will go to hell. So the hot dog which has entered into your mouth has defiled you and prepared you for your eternal damnation. On the other hand, there is no condemnation of the novels of Father Greeley, where the characters have all kinds of swearing and cursing coming out of their mouths. Father Greeley is a priest in good standing in the Catholic Church and has been praised by Church leaders, such as for example, Cardinal Mahony. So this is a difference between Catholic teaching and the teaching of the Bible which says:
“Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man: but what cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.”
or in the basic English version:
" Not that which goes into the mouth makes a man unclean, but that which comes out of the mouth."
Matthew 15:11.
B
bobzills
Guest
The Orthodox that I have talked to say that they do not accept Purgatory. period. I have also noticed that this was the position of several of the Orthodox posters here at CAF. However, Catholics tend to minimise the differences on this point. I could be wrong, but it looks to me like many Orthodox are not willing to accept the idea that what they believe on this, is in any fashion similar to the Catholic teaching on purgatory.
P
peary
Guest
**In Christ’s time, the Pharisees fasted twice a week, on Mondays and Thursdays. In His parable the Pharisee prayed, Lk 18:12 “I fast twice a week.” Christians, following ancient Jewish traditions of fast and abstinence for penance, observed the law of fasting on Wednesdays and Friday abstinence from the time of Christ’s Crucifixion. The Didache (Teachings of the Apostles), chapter 8: “But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week. Rather, fast on the fourth day and the Preparation.” (Wednesday and Friday).
As the centuries passed, the original requirement to fast twice a week was reduced. But, during the Church’s entire history, until 1966, all Fridays have been obligatory days of abstinence from meat on pain of mortal sin.
Since 1966, All Fridays during Lent remain obligatory days of abstinence from meat on pain of mortal sin. All other Fridays remain days of penance. The ordinary penance is absention from meat. However, on non-Lenten Fridays, the faithful may substitute another penance. The substituted penance should involve a level of sacrifice comparable to abstention from meat.
When Friday coincides with a solemnity we are dispensed from penance, in order that we might concentrate more fully on the occasion for the solemnity. All Holy Days of Obligation are solemnities.**
R
rinnie
Guest
I am sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. It is one thing to argue about the RCC and disagree with the Religion, that is your right, but for goodness sake at least know what the heck you are talking about. CCC 1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by grave violation of Gods law it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him. VENIAL SIN allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it. unquote. Now i am sorry but eating a hotdog on lent is not turning you away from God and going to send you to hell. I just have one thing to say about this Father Greeley if he is a Catholic Priest, i cant believe he is teaching this stuff, I think Father deserves the benefit of the doubt and what is happening to Father is the same thing that people do with the faith and scripture all the time. They are misunderstanding what is being said and run with it, Telling what they are hearing not what is being said. Do me a favor ask Father on sunday if eating the hotdog is a venial sin or mortal, you will see Father is getting a bad rap here, he will say venial sin. It is not the priests fault you dont comprehend his teachings. I really do think you are just learning the faith, but please first learn it before you try to preach it. I know you mean well, at least I hope you do. But it is very difficult to understand and it doesnt come in a week, month it takes years. for most of us a lifetime of studying. that is why Priests, Bishops dont become Cardinals, etc overnight. It takes years and years of studying the faith, day and night, and some are only called to be Priests. Not Bishops, etc.
S
sbanks
Guest
For Bobzills. I am not a theoligian nor do I play one on this board. But you have legitimate questions that I too have asked or wondered about. The good thing about it is that it stirs up conversation and also research, study and prayer for all of us.
You need to remember one thing however, you cannot take a verse out of context and use it as a proof-text. Although the headline looks good and can cause a riot, it is has been pulled out of context. And sometimes the context of the scripture contains hints that the history of the time and traditions are a key player in the context of the scripture. So I would encourage you to read the whole chapter or book, understand who they were talking to, where and why…having said that here are some of my viewpoints.
You need to remember one thing however, you cannot take a verse out of context and use it as a proof-text. Although the headline looks good and can cause a riot, it is has been pulled out of context. And sometimes the context of the scripture contains hints that the history of the time and traditions are a key player in the context of the scripture. So I would encourage you to read the whole chapter or book, understand who they were talking to, where and why…having said that here are some of my viewpoints.
- “Call no man your father”… *Well why would I not call the father of my birth father?
Jesus is obviously referring to God the Father, not my earthly father. As Paul wrote to the Corinthians or Ephesians and introduced Timothy as his son, he is referring to him that he mentored him in the faith and that he became like a son. Also, Paul referred to himself as a spiritual father figure for all to follow. This is what a priest does, he is our spiritual father figure, he is their to give us guidance and keep us on the straight and narrow path towards God. It is not a literal translation.
- “Call no man your father”… *Well why would I not call the father of my birth father?
- . Deuteronomy 22:5
A woman shall not wear a man’s apparel, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment; for whoever does such things is abhorrent to the LORD your God.
Contradiction: Catholic women wear pants to Church. Father Kunkel says this is against God’s command: lffa-ollmpc.com/standards.htm
Your question pertains to the old laws of the jewish faith – referred to as sundry laws.
Upon the Jesus’s sacrifice and death the people (gentiles & jews ) were no longer bound by them. I reference this link catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9306ntg.asp - Catholic women are Eucharistic servers, readers, assist at the altar and do not wear headcoverings. Contradiction: 1 Cor 11: 5:” But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, brings shame upon her head, for that is all one as if she were shaven."
Read the remaining verses of this and you will see that the woman’s hair is her head covering. Paul also goes on to explain that
I Cor 11:11-12 11However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and (N)all things originate (O)from God.
S
sbanks
Guest
Bobzills: Just another note about your link to Father Kunkel says this is against God’s command: lffa-ollmpc.com/standards.htm
– It appears to me that Father Kunkel is definitely referring to those members of the Our Lady’s Martyrs of Purity Crusade. So if you wanted to be member of that order then these are the requirements. This does not relate to me or my wife or daughter since we are not members of this order or parish. Similiar if you wanted to be a member at Augusta Hills then you could only wear pants on the golf course if you are a man and a skirt if you are a woman.
– It appears to me that Father Kunkel is definitely referring to those members of the Our Lady’s Martyrs of Purity Crusade. So if you wanted to be member of that order then these are the requirements. This does not relate to me or my wife or daughter since we are not members of this order or parish. Similiar if you wanted to be a member at Augusta Hills then you could only wear pants on the golf course if you are a man and a skirt if you are a woman.
W
whizkid43
Guest
Bad sbanks, bad, bad, bad. You’re reading things in context, stop it… :dts:
R
rinnie
Guest
EXACTLY, Now Someone is going to read this and say, all RCC say that you must follow this order. Next thing you know they again will be telling us what we do, not vice-versa. This is the stuff people dont understand and use against us. Just because we are Catholics doesnt mean that are called to this Order. Nor are we saying this order is wrong. We just arent all called to it. Yet maybe never. I could see this one getting blown all out of proportion fast.
P
peary
Guest
It actually isn’t a religious ‘order’ - it’s a personal apostolate.
R
rinnie
Guest
See there you go, i myself dont know much about it. I only know that i believe that it may be the one my Aunt used to follow. I have to ask my Mom. It very well may not be or she may have followed a few. All i can remember is she was also laid out in this, it reminded me of a monk outfit. The only reason i remember it was because she only died 5 years ago. God bless her but she was one of those real religious People who God forgive me always preached it but never really lived it. I guess to her best knowledge she did. We never though she would die. You know the kind (just a joke) God wasnt ready for her and the devil was afraid she would take over the place. We figured she would live forever. But God bless her she did know the Religion, ill give her that. Lived in church, when people saw her come they all would run. good and bad. Niw look at me now i am going to have to go to confession, sorry
P
peary
Guest
Ministry Vs. Apostolate
(Jimmy Akin)
A reader writes:
What is the difference between a ministry and an apostolate? What does the Church teach on this? And lastly, are there restrictions on laymen, for example, who use the term ministry when in all actuality it is an apostolate?
This is a common question. People are often perplexed by the relationship between the two terms and the fact that they are often used interchangeably. And there’s a good reason for that: They are interchangeable–at least substantially so.
The term ministry (in a religious context) at its base conveys the idea of performing a spiritual service of some kind, while the term apostolate at its base conveys the idea of in some manner promoting the work of the apostles or functioning in a capacity somewhat like that of the apostles. Since the apostles performed spiritual services, the two terms basically converge.
Thus both “ministry” and “apostolate” can refer either to particular spiritual services or to organizations that are devoted to providing such services.
Because the clergy and laity have different functions, they perform ministries or apostolates in different ways, but the laity are envisioned in participating in apostolic activity. Thus Vatican II issued a Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity.
With recent dissident efforts at horizontalizing the Church and bluring the distinction between clergy and laity, there can be confusion about what apostolates are appropriate to clergy and laity. The same thing can happen regarding ministries, and the 1997 Instruction on Collaboration was notably concerned about the use of the term “ministry” in certain contexts involving lay individuals, for example (see Practical Provisions, Article 1).
Despite these difficulties, the two terms retain substantial overlap, even if they need to be carefully understood and distinguished in particular contexts.
(Jimmy Akin)
A reader writes:
What is the difference between a ministry and an apostolate? What does the Church teach on this? And lastly, are there restrictions on laymen, for example, who use the term ministry when in all actuality it is an apostolate?
This is a common question. People are often perplexed by the relationship between the two terms and the fact that they are often used interchangeably. And there’s a good reason for that: They are interchangeable–at least substantially so.
The term ministry (in a religious context) at its base conveys the idea of performing a spiritual service of some kind, while the term apostolate at its base conveys the idea of in some manner promoting the work of the apostles or functioning in a capacity somewhat like that of the apostles. Since the apostles performed spiritual services, the two terms basically converge.
Thus both “ministry” and “apostolate” can refer either to particular spiritual services or to organizations that are devoted to providing such services.
Because the clergy and laity have different functions, they perform ministries or apostolates in different ways, but the laity are envisioned in participating in apostolic activity. Thus Vatican II issued a Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity.
With recent dissident efforts at horizontalizing the Church and bluring the distinction between clergy and laity, there can be confusion about what apostolates are appropriate to clergy and laity. The same thing can happen regarding ministries, and the 1997 Instruction on Collaboration was notably concerned about the use of the term “ministry” in certain contexts involving lay individuals, for example (see Practical Provisions, Article 1).
Despite these difficulties, the two terms retain substantial overlap, even if they need to be carefully understood and distinguished in particular contexts.
P
peary
Guest
Your aunt probably was a member of the Secular Franciscan Order (SFO) which is comprised of men and women follow the way of Francis, but are not vowed religious living in community. If her habit (garb) was brown, then that is what she belonged to, in which case, she belonged to an actual religious order.By the way, the robe is optional.
B
bobzills
Guest
Really? Eating meat on a Friday which is a day of abstinence is not a mortal sin? I did not know that.
- Status