And I wish you well on yours as wellThanks for responding. Actually, I’ve already visited your site (I could have done that in the first place, sorry) and now have the full picture. I wish you well as you continue on your journey.
Grace and peace,
Mick
You would need to go back and see what was said. I said I had learned certain things from Catholic theologians and relgious. The claim was that if I studied Catholic theology I could not leave the Church therefore I must be untruthful. I consider that bizarre reasoning to say the least. I have no duty to prove this, and cannot absent sending my school records which is silly. If the person disagrees with my conclusions, that is one thing, but to essential claim I am being untruthful makes further discussion meaningless and illogical. As I said, you must go back and read the entire corpus of this person’s remarks.
That of course is your opinion, and you are welcome to it, but of course that doesn’t really mean much to the world beyond your doorstep does it?
It is pleasant to have someone put into words so well what I have been trying unsuccessfully to say!
I would Mary, but they would include any number of books on theology and biblical exegesis written by folks I doubt you would accept as valid. I am merely stating the general belief of most biblical experts today. There is no perfect statement of that. Again, I learned some of it from a Christology class at a Catholic College, taught by a priest and a Domican sister. Both had degrees in theology of the systematic variety, from Brussels. I suppose I could try to look through some of my old textbooks, if it would in fact be a factor in your decision to accept it or not. I suspect it would not. I’m not sure this is part of our conversation. We fairly got off on a bit of a tangent in our discussion.
You fairly said that I was plainly wrong. What you have said in this post I agree with, and I do my best to do exactly as you have written. I have read widely in a large number of spiritual areas, and I have learned from them all. All contribute in some way to my fuller understanding of God and what I believe he desires for us. I reject no teachings of Jesus that I am aware of. But of course, as you must agree, it depends on what is being interpreted and by whom. Faith is forever a learning process, and must never stop I hope.
Of course I have run across such claims, from heretics attempting to justify their heterodoxy. The writings of the Church Fathers and the historical record refutes your claims and reasons for separating yourself from the Church. Historical revisionism isn’t going to change that fact.
That’s nice that you have learned from Catholic theologians, but that has no bearing on what I said. I understood what the claim was, but was not saying to same thing. If you could please look at the individual, and consider what I said, it would be appreciated. Please don’t take this to mean something it did not. What I said was very simple in that because someone tells you they don’t believe you, does not equate to you being a liar, unless you accept the standard that the other person has all knowledge and has made a final conclusion. Otherwise, there is more discussion… if you want.
It was interesting, but, it made far too many assumptions of my post, that were in fact incorrect.
My statement of faith was different than yours. However, I asked that we both keep learning since the truth is bigger than either of us.
What you’ve detailed above makes sense to me.
It does make some sense, but doesn’t specifically address the original intention. I could see how the misunderstanding could have occurred, and hopefully it is better understood after additional explanation.
No I call it hypocracy when someone professes to belong to the one true church established by christ, implies they adhere to all its teachings, and yet support women to have abortions, support the womans right to chose in this matter, and have had abortions themselves. Looking no further than my own relatives, I call it hypocracy when someone close to me waits for their mother to go to work so her boyfriend can come over and they can have sex, using contraception obviously, as we wouldnt want a catholic scandal would we, and then makes a big display of going to church on a sunday and receiving the Holy Eucharist.
Interesting comments. This could apply to some people as we see evidence, but certainly is limited in scope and leaves out other Catholics from this discussion. We can also place limitations on ourselves by lacking faith, and demanding that what is supernatural be proven to our human minds. In this case, we are deciding what religion is, rather than adhering to it. It’s the Holy Spirit that moves hearts. It would be arrogant and foolish for the Catholic or anyone else to believe they do it completely with their words and explanations.What you’ve detailed above makes sense to me.
Perhaps the reason difficulties are encountered is because the apologists sometimes fall into the trap of supposing that they can “prove” the truth of that which they hold dear?
I don’t think such a thing is possible simply because people bring different presuppositions to the debate. If one presupposes that the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth because it claims to be One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, then one is obviously going to process every single fact, challenge, suggestion, assertion, rumor and accusation through that filter. However, somebody who is not convinced by the truth claims of the Catholic Church is going to think along very different lines and therefore come to a very different conclusion.
A worthy example to consider might be the doctrine of papal infallibility promulgated in 1870 by Vatican I. The duty of all Catholics is to trust and obey the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. So once this doctrine was proclaimed by the Catholic Church the question was settled for every Catholic.
But for somebody who has a worldview that does not recognize the Catholic Church as having the authority that it claims for itself Catholic teaching is open to question. That’s the central point. So when the Catholic apologists argue the case for papal infallibility – especially the kind of apologist that thinks his or her task is to “prove” the case – we that are not Catholic simply don’t get it. The argument sounds like somebody who says, “I claim to be telling the truth therefore I must be telling the truth.”
That routine seems to carry forward into every area. So, if somebody who is not a Catholic raises an objection to a Catholic tenet the inevitable references to the Church Fathers soon come tumbling out (which “prove” the Catholic case), followed by accusations of heresy. But the case is only “proved” in the minds of Catholics. That’s because they start out holding the assumption that the case is already settled and any dissent must therefore be purposeful and stubborn refusal to accept what is true.
I haven’t had any Catholic call me a heretic yet but perhaps I’ve shown enough dissent on this occasion to warrant it?
Rebelliously,
Mick
Tangent it was but none the less interesting. God Bless.
Thanks for expressing yourself. It’s interesting. I can’t yet congratulate you on accurately presenting my beliefs, so we’re not really having a straight discussion yet. For instance, I think you mistake great confidence (which didn’t come easily or quickly) for a closed mind. One seeking all possibilities would consider this as well. When discussing Christianity, what natures do we have to discuss other than flesh or spirit? I have to wonder if you have considered what these were intended to mean.
You rock!!
My relative to whom I refered in another post does not have lack of knowledge. She is fully aware that having sex outside of marriage is a sin and against the churches teachings. She is fully aware that using contraception is against catholic church teaching. She and her boyfriend decided to go against that teaching, deliberately, for reasons of pleasure, gratification and intimacy. They went to church every sunday, received the Holy Eucharist, and carried on as they were. When they saved up enough money, they bought their house and moved in together. 2 years later they got married. In a catholic church.