Fr. John died and, as promised, the very next night he came to Fr. James in a dream. "My friend, we both were so wrong. But it would not help for me to try to describe eternal life. Mortal minds are not able to comprehend it. But it's nothing to fear." But God bless everybody.Jesus is Lord. That’s doctrine.
**
Notice Christ also didn’t say you must love Him as God either. What a perfect time that would have been to explain the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity. So because of the absense of that particular Doctrine, it sounds like you’re saying the Holy Trinity is reeeeeally not that big a deal after all as long as we just love each other.
Actually, I am saying that more to less. The early Christians battled long over the issue of the Trinity. The Arians and various others fought against the Trinitarian formula.
Now, I'm ready to accept it with a certain definition. God the Creator and Sustainer. Christ the Son, the incarnation and interpreter and messenger. The Holy Ghost, the spirit of God in the world. Or, maybe use the analogy of the sun. Didn't Aquinas do that? The sun is the Father, source of light and heat. Christ is the light. The Holy Spirit is the heat. Etc.
There are passages in the Gospels that always have made me wonder about the doctrine of the Trinity. Take Matt. 19:17 and Mark 10:18. Jesus said: "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God...." Now, isn't that in clear contradiction to the Trinitarian argument that Christ = God? I know there are verses in the other direction, but is it any wonder that arguments over doctrine persist, all parties able to quote what appear to be conflicting verses?
While I come from a mixed Catholic/Protestant background - and maybe because of that - I am attracted to those broad thinkers who shy away from doctrinal dogmatism and respect a diversity of views among fellow Christians. To me, this doesn't diminish my basic faith in God but it provides the intellectual freedom to explore, research, weigh, ponder, and investigate the complex world of theology without the pressure to arrive only at conclusions approved by traditionalists within the Catholic church or by one of numerous sola scriptura Protestants. Dogmatism has little appeal to me. I presume that automatically puts me outside the Church and endangers my eternal soul??? I actually believe God delights in honest awe when we consider the Divine, that some folks (like me) simply don't pretend to understand this vast and mysterious world, but place our trust in the Almighty rather than any hierarchy or denomination or catechism.
God bless Catholics, Protestants and people of every creed, color and country. May religion serve as a bridge instead of as a barrier.No, why do you think that is? Jesus was hiding the ball. Every time someone recognized him as the Christ, the Son of the Living God, Jesus told them to pipe down because His hour had not yet come.
Fine. You seem to make unity the priority thing. I was raised in a Catholic/Protestant situation - a long story - but have studied religion in some detail. Spent time at a Trappist monastery, keep informed through EWTN, Catholic radio, *Our Sunday Visitor,* attending mass, etc,
Unlike you, apparently, I find myself moving further away from traditional Catholicism. I emphasize traditional because most Catholics I know resemble me in that we think for ourselves. We do not view doctrinal orthodoxy and required conformity as a plus in this era of more and more well-educated, thinking people.
You mention Baptism and you give different views by different denominations. As for me personally, there are various explanations and traditions re Baptism and they all would be acceptable in what I call 'big tent' Christianity. There is an argument for believers' baptism by immersion - if Jesus is our model he was immersed at age 30. There is an argument for infant baptism. I don't feel it essential that Christians all take the same position on that. We have in this area several federated Protestant churches, where - for example - Baptists, Congregationalists and Methodists merged. They offer baptism by different means and at different ages. The Eastern Orthodox, as you know, immerse babies, and confirm them in the same ceremony! Personally, I don't think God cares a hoot about such differences. He regards the heart rather than ancient practices that vary from place to place.
I crave Christian unity, but not union. We can be united in spirit while not united organically. There is, as you know, a World Council of Churches that brings together many denominations around the world. That's enough for me. Diversity within unity.
More and more Christians, at least among my friends, are much less concerned about doctrinal conformity than they are about cooperation among Christians to feed the hungry, etc.
Okay. Now, this incessant talk of 20,000 denominations is exaggerated poppycock. There are 7-8 main denominational families among Protestants: Baptists, Methodists (Wesleyans), Reformed (Presbyterians, Congregationalists, etc.), Lutherans, Anglicans, and Pentecostalists. There probably are 100 or even many more Wesleyan groups - like the United Methodist Church in the USA, the Methodists in Britain, the Methodists in North India, the Church of The Nazarene, the Salvation Army - etc., all part of the World Methodist Council. In addition there are the Mennonite groups that I admire, and the Quakers whom I especially love. Groups like the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are not Protestants, of course.
I have no problem with you finding your faith in Catholicism. I deeply admire priests and nuns who do so much good in the world, especially in distant and impoverished. lands. I admire much of Catholic education and Catholic hospitals.
It's Catholic insistence upon doctrinal conformity that tends to alienate me. Perhaps I'm too influenced by American democracy, but I favor 'think and let think'. Was it Wesley who said: "If you love God as I love God, let us join hands and walk together."?
So, my problem with Catholicism, since a child actually, was its claim to be the one and only true church and its insistence upon doctrinal conformity. Back in college I wrote a thesis on St. Thomas Aquinas, and to use 'caged' books (forbidden to read) I had to get the signature of a priest. Didn't like that. I feel that Catholicism forces the faithful to wear blinders, when I treasure the freedom to ponder, weigh, investigate, research, perhaps even doubt, or take a neutral position. Was the Virgin Mary a lifelong virgin? Perhaps, but does it matter? She married Joseph, after all, and today lack of conjugal relations would be cause for annulment.
And isn't it strangem by the way, that Jesus' lineage in both Matthew and Luke is traced through Joseph?
I also have questions about all sorts of apparitions, levitation and bilocation by saints (even Padre Pio), veneration of relics, adulation of the Pope, yes, even transubstantiation and the ability of priests to declare that someone's sins are forgiven. I leave that to God.
We could go on and on. I love exploring theology and refuse to submit my God-given search for spiritual truth to any church or preacher. I'm quite sure God respects the earnest seeker after truth. When Jesus was asked point-blank how to inherit eternal life, he said nothing about doctrine. Love God and love one another. That's the core of my Christian commitment, and otherwise I walk by a simple faith and not by knowledge.
God bless Catholic, Protestants and people of every creed, color and country. May religion serve as a bridge rather than as a barrier.First of all, Christian doctrine is not a fragmentary collection of truths, but a compact system ot truths organically elaborated, in which reason moves in the light of faith and divine revelation. It is also a science, but a science that transcends the subject matter and the method of common human sciences, because its principles consist in a datum or known fact which rests on the authority of God, the infallible Truth. The datum or premise is divine revelation consigned in two sources: Holy Scripture and Tradition. Custodian and authentic interpreter of both these sources is the living and infallible teaching authority of the Church instituted by Jesus Christ.
Even St. Thomas Aquinas said that the church should not execute heretics but should deliver them over to the state which had the responsibility to kill them!
The position of Catholicism has changed considerably over the years - thank God! But it still hangs on to this concept, shared with Islam, that there is only one true religion and it is theirs! I find so much in the Catholicism of my father's lineage to admire, but that exclusivity and arrogance aliens me. Sorry.How do you know God is Love?
How do you know what you’ve experienced is love?
Exactly how much “exclusivity” is allowable before it becomes “arrogance”?
That proves you haven’t read it. Read it now and notice what it says right at the top about the Pope.
The fact that the Church has supported the United States of America since July 4, 1776 is highly damaging to your fable.
Yes, Franco was supported by the Catholic Church in order to put an end to the [Red Terror](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red Terror (Spain)). But after the end of said Terror the Church planted Opus Dei operatives in Franco’s cabinet in order to force the Franco government towards democracy (with the backing of the USA, I might add!)
That’s exactly what the Church did. The only inquisition that was actually run by the Church was the [Roman Inquisition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman Inquisition), and it executed exactly two people. My democratic state has executed many more (sadly).
Some fraternal correction is in order, along with the admonition to check the facts.
That’s because you have yet to seriously evaluate Catholicism and the Church’s claims.
From Scripture and the Tradition of the Christian Church.
No,
The same way that you know whether or not you’ve experienced love.
yes