Do you find Catholics a bit "strange"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE post [the RCC & Birth Control]

**Biblically **

Genesis 4:1 The man had intercourse with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain. ‘I have acquired a man with the help of Yahweh,’ she said.

Birth is Controlled by God
John.1 Verses 12 to 14: “But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. “

Romans 1: 26-32 “For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips,
Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them.”

Eph.5: “Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

Rev.22: 15 “Outside [in hell] are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters**, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.”**

Gen. 1:28 “And God blessed them, [Adam and Eve] and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

Gen.9: 1 “And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth”

THIS MESSAGE OF BE FRUITFUL & MULTIPLE APPEARS ABOUT 30 TIMES IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS [mean s “Life”]


**Gen.38: 6-10 **“And Judah took a wife for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah’s first-born, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. Then Judah [the Father of both sons] said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. **And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also” ** MEANING GOD KILLED HIM BOTH PHYSICALLY AND SPIRITUALLY [condemned to ETERNAL Hell!]

Historically

AGAPE BIBLE STUDY: www.agapebiblestudy.com

Question: How many Old Testament women can you recall who were barren but later, by the will of God, gave birth to men who had an important impact on salvation history? Name the women and their sons

Answer:
Sarah was barren prior to the birth of Isaac (Gen 11:30; 21:1-3).
Rebekah was barren prior to the birth of Jacob/Israel (Gen 25:21-26).
Rachel was barren prior to the birth of Joseph (Gen 29:31; 30:22-23).
Manoah’s wife was barren prior to the birth of the Judge Samson (Judg 13:1-7, 24).
Hannah was barren prior to the birth of the Prophet Samuel (1 Sam 1:1-5, 19-21).

In each case the bareness of the mother was reversed by God’s intervention. It is by God’s divine will that sons were born from these women’sons who played an important role in God’s plan of salvation:

So my friend, I ask again:

Who do you permit to be in charge of your life:shrug:

PRAY MUCH about this
 
My wife is a convert who now knows more about the Catholic faith than I who grew up in a Catholic home:o, does have one area she is uncomfortable with.
Uncorrupted bodies of saints.
She understands the teaching and agrees with it. It just freaks her out a little.
 
You’re speaking of Saintly RELICS; termed “Sacraments”

They are meant to lead one CLOSER to Jesus. The STORY of the dead “body” [one supposes] unbured is VERY strange. PERSONALLY I doubt its veracity:shrug:

God Bless,
Patrick.
I think you meant sacramentals?

🤷 I find different tellings of the story on the net. It ranges from obscure “a miracle” to bringing in a corpse for the ill person to place their hand on, to putting the corpse in bed with the sick man. If I were fluent in Spanish perhaps I could flesh out the original story.
 
My wife is a convert who now knows more about the Catholic faith than I who grew up in a Catholic home:o, does have one area she is uncomfortable with.
Uncorrupted bodies of saints.
She understands the teaching and agrees with it. It just freaks her out a little.
If I remember from another post that you wrote - wasn’t your wife originally Syriac Orthodox? Why does an uncorrupted saint’s body bother her? There are similar occurrences in Orthodoxy as well.
 
Why fish? I mean, come on, fish? Fish is basically a vegetable. Ban fish.
My understanding is that in Italy and other costal cities, fish was the food of the poor. To refrain from eating non fish meat was a way of sacrificing something one day a week. There could also be a connection with the fact that Peter was a fisherman and the symbolism of refraining from eating meat was a reminder of who the first Christians really were.

It isn’t a matter of meat versus vegetables but I believe that it is an ancient symbol of solidarity with the poor.

I should imagine that going to an expensive restaurant and ordering lobster on Friday would defeat the purpose however.
 
My wife is a convert who now knows more about the Catholic faith than I who grew up in a Catholic home:o, does have one area she is uncomfortable with.
Uncorrupted bodies of saints.
She understands the teaching and agrees with it. It just freaks her out a little.
This is of course GOD’s impute.

The Church Fathers sees is not only as affirmation of Sainthood; BUT a very limited GRACE from God indicating HIS Approval of there life’s example:thumbsup:

God Bless you,

Patrick
 
**You’re speaking of Saintly RELICS; termed “Sacraments”
**

God Bless,
Patrick.
Okay, this confuses me…relics of saints are “sacraments?” Or did I understand this wrong?

Rita
 
Do I find Catholics strange?: hmmm… Well I might if they spoke to me…
 
My understanding is that in Italy and other costal cities, fish was the food of the poor. To refrain from eating non fish meat was a way of sacrificing something one day a week. There could also be a connection with the fact that Peter was a fisherman and the symbolism of refraining from eating meat was a reminder of who the first Christians really were.

It isn’t a matter of meat versus vegetables but I believe that it is an ancient symbol of solidarity with the poor.

I should imagine that going to an expensive restaurant and ordering lobster on Friday would defeat the purpose however.
It is most likely on the first part, fish being poor man food. Meat would be considered more of a complete meal. Thus abstaining from meat would be a greater sense of missing and abstinence. On the other hand, in a culture where meat is not the main diet, missing out on it is not a sacrifice at all. So where does it leave us in the way of fasting?

I guess it is more on corporate fasting, doing it in solidarity with all the faithful. It is not meant to punish or torture but to experience the absence when we could have it but did not.
 
Okay, this confuses me…relics of saints are “sacraments?” Or did I understand this wrong?

Rita
Actually they are Termed: "Sacramentals"

FROM SERVANT OF GOD: FATHER JOHN A HARDON S J Catholic Dictionary:

SACRAMENTAL. “Objects or actions that the Church uses after the manner of sacraments, in order to achieve through the merits of the faithful certain effects, mainly of a spiritual nature. They differ from sacraments in not having been instituted by Christ to produce their effect in virtue of the ritual performed. Their efficacy depends not on the rite itself, as in the sacraments, but on the influence of prayerful petition; that of the person who uses them and of the Church in approving their practice. The variety of sacramentals spans the whole range of times and places, words and actions, objects and gestures that, on the Church’s authority, draw not only on the personal dispositions of the individual but on the merits and prayers of the whole Mystical Body of Christ.”

God Bless you,

Patrick
 
Okay, this confuses me…relics of saints are “sacraments?” Or did I understand this wrong?

Rita
Hi. Yes, it can be quite confusing especially if you are non-Catholics. 🙂

Simple lay man explanation - relics of saints are called ‘sacramental objects’, nothing to do with Sacraments and they are NOT Sacraments.

Sacramental means simply a simple liturgy of the Catholic Church, sometimes as simple as a blessing with the sign of the cross by ordained ministers. Once it is done, the blessed object now is a sacramental object. Examples - rosaries, crucifixes, medals, …

It is different from Sacraments where the ordained minister that administer them act in the person of Jesus, the Sacraments being instituted by Christ himself. Sacramental is by the Catholic Church. It is lower than the Sacrament but higher than personal prayer, as it is from the intercession of the Church as a whole.

Hope that helps.
 
Do you find Catholics a “bit strange?”

WHY do Catholics Do THAT?

or WHY Do Catholics Believe THAT?

or WHY do Catholics Act like that?

With charity plesse:)
I find everybody is strange, myself included!
 
As a Catholic who spent her adult years in protestant denominations and non-denominations, I really didnt have any contact with Catholics except my own non-practicing Catholic family members. I did work with an ex-Catholic who bashed Catholics and non-Catholic Christians equally. Now that I am back in full communion with the Catholic Church, I do find Catholics ‘a bit strange’, on one noticeably different aspect from my non-Catholic Christian friends. Whereas my friends are heavily into the Bible, studying God’s word, I find Catholics going out of their way to avoid it. I find that strange. Isnt God’s word, God’s word? If it is one of the three legs that sustains The Church aside from the Magisterium and Tradition, why avoid it? That aspect alone is what my non-Catholic Christian friends do not understand and what makes them label Catholics as not Christian. Because they have no idea why someone calling themselves a Christian is Biblically illiterate.
Well I happen to follow the dictate of St Jerome who said “ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ”
 
I"m 52 Catholic all my life, and have never heard of such a thing until I came on this website.
When we went to sell our house we found St. Joseph tucked in our blinds and somewhere else, I forget where. Our realtor did that.
 
I always thought the Catholic prohibition of contraception as a bit strange.

Why would God care whether you use NFP or artificial means? The two seem to me the same as far as God is concerned, except that second one is more reliable.

This question becomes especially important in light of the new Zika virus.
As a Catholic I also did not really understand the prohibition but accepted it, allowing God to have Lordship over my fertility and trusting in His Providence in supporting our needs. It all worked out, and when I was past childbearing years I discovered a book that explained the issue perfectly.

Married couples can only achieve pregnancy during a few days of each menstrual cycle, therefore, by avoiding the potentially fertile days,births can be spaced out in a natural way. This “periodic abstinence” may not be easy, however, it can be used as a way of continuing the ‘courtship’ between couples, helping to keep the relationship “fresh”, giving them something to look forward to.

An act of intercourse which remains open to the transmission of life is like a wedding feast to which all family members are invited. When contraception is used, a potential family member is being denied entry to the feast.

Contraception has had a disastrous effect on respect for human life.
 
As a Catholic, I find the Catholic willingness to tolerate being wronged a bit strange. Heck, most people/denominations would take far less abuse and keep coming back for more.

For example, when the ‘Wymenpriests’ folks are banned from their parishes, they inevitably are welcomed and allowed the use of the nearest Episcopal, ChurchofChrist, Methodist or some other facility to pretend in their performance. Any other church would consider that aiding and abetting and send out a strongly worded letter and perhaps cut ties. Catholics, nah, just turn the other cheek over and over.
Mt 5: 11-16

"11] Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: [12] Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you. [13] You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt lose its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is good for nothing any more but to be cast out, and to be trodden on by men. [14] You are the light of the world. A city seated on a mountain cannot be hid. [15] Neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel, but upon a candlestick, that it may shine to all that are in the house.

[16] So let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven" AMEN!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top