Drawn to Catholicism...but have reservations.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thepeug
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you defending the view that judging an entire ethnic group merely superficially is valid? I am an average Catholic hispanic. I’m no ‘doctor.’ Your bigoted remarks are unappreciated.
Click to expand...
Do not put words in my mouth or assign me things to defend! I am Cuban dude, and no bigot. I work with and am surrounded by Hispanics of all stripes! The comments I have made reflect personal experience and are not meant to be a “judgement against” any ethnic group, specially one to which I belong. Cuban bishops in Miami a few years ago came out with a pastoral letter assesing the state of Catholicism among us and listed as problems some of the same things I mentioned… syncretism. lack of comitment and ignorace of the faith. Are they judgemental and biggots as well?

As for you being an “average” hispanic RC… pardon my unbelief “chico”! Have you seen the census reports on the English language proficiency and educational attainment of “average” hispanics in the US. Even among Cubans and South Americans , it is below the average for Anglos. You are a well educated, English literate person with a green card who happens to be informed about his faith…and is in need of a reality check.

While you insist all is well in flawless English …the Jehova’s Witness visit your less informed Hispanic neighbours and in poor Spanish convince them to leave your Church…quite sucessfully it seems.

God bless

Serafin
 
Cuban bishops in Miami a few years ago came out with a pastoral letter assesing the state of Catholicism among us … syncretism. lack of comitment and ignorace of the faith.
Click to expand...
What a coincidence! That problem exists within ALL ethnic group of Catholicism. In fact, it exists within ALL ethnic groups of Christianity at large.

So why is it that you focused your insulting remarks upon Hispanic Catholics? See the bigotry yet?
talk with an average Hispanic catholic about their faith and pious practices…try to keep a straight face!
Click to expand...
Did the study use the bigoted remark that you used above? I can care less if you’re Cuban. Your remark was insulting. Your failure to admit it tells me much about you.

You have an answer for Chalcedon? Or are your skills limited to mere “argument by sneer?”

God bless,

Dave
 
Serafin,

It seems strikingly odd that, as I re-read through this entire thread, everyone was very polite, even those non-Catholics giving an alternative opinion. All until you felt a strange impulse to describe Hispanic Catholicism as laughable. Were we supposed to take such remarks as an expression of charity? If so, I believe you missed the mark.

God bless,

Dave
 
Dave,

Thanks for the links. I’ll be sure to check them out.

In Christ,
Chris
 
Hi:
What a coincidence! That problem exists within ALL ethnic group of Catholicism. In fact, it exists within ALL ethnic groups of Christianity at large.
Click to expand...
I cannot speak to this, only to what I know. I do not doubt that all of us could be more informed about our faith.
So why is it that you focused your insulting remarks upon Hispanic Catholics? See the bigotry yet?
Click to expand...
I’m sorry you are insulted. Not all Hispanic Catholics are ignorant of their faith or supersticious in their devotions, many I have encountered unfortunately are…it is not bigotry to state that fact!
Did the study use the bigoted remark that you used above? I can care less if you’re Cuban. Your remark was insulting. Your failure to admit it tells me much about you.
Click to expand...
No, the pastoral letter was more charitable, but no less true.
I meant no insult, since you bring to my attention you felt insulted I apologize wholeheartedly!
You have an answer for Chalcedon? Or are your skills limited to mere “argument by sneer?”
Click to expand...
I do not have to answer for Chalcedon! RC’s and Orthodox have been at it for centuries . Once you agree who is the “real” Real Church and wether the Pope is infalible, Chalcedon will not be a problem for the rest of us. I intervened in this thread to advise the “Seeking Episcopalian” that in my limited experience,not all was fine across the Tiber.
It seems strikingly odd that, as I re-read through this entire thread, everyone was very polite, even those non-Catholics giving an alternative opinion. All until you felt a strange impulse to describe Hispanic Catholicism as laughable.
Click to expand...
You may very well be right and I am quite willing to learn forum politeness. Thankyou for pointing it out!
talk with an average Hispanic catholic about their faith and pious practices…try to keep a straight face…
Click to expand...
All until you felt a strange impulse to describe Hispanic Catholicism as laughable.
Click to expand...
Please do not generalize and broaden my statements! How is this “Hispanic Catholicism”? When did I say it was funny? shock and dismay are also reflected in faces!

Blessings

Serafin
 
I wanted to add this: I love the Authority the Pope has in guiding Christ’s Church. Jesus knew our nature, our weakness and pride. He knew His Church would need a guiding moral light to shepard His flock in his absense. Jesus knew Satan will never stop attacking Christians inciting division within to weaken our unity. I love knowing I can trust the Pope to guide me where God wants me to be. The battlefield is in our minds. 🙂
 
40.png
CONVERT:
I wanted to add this: I love the Authority the Pope has in guiding Christ’s Church. Jesus knew our nature, our weakness and pride. He knew His Church would need a guiding moral light to shepard His flock in his absense. Jesus knew Satan will never stop attacking Christians inciting division within to weaken our unity. I love knowing I can trust the Pope to guide me where God wants me to be. The battlefield is in our minds. 🙂
Click to expand...
That’s the problem…I’d love to place my faith in the hands of an infallible Church leader as well. The Pope can definitively answer quesions with which all Christians struggle, and in doing so, provide a sense of unity that is unavailable to Protestants or Orthodox.

Unfortunately, I fear that such a notion is too idealistic. I’m uncomfortable with the idea of checking reason and common sense at the door when it comes to Church authority. Lumen Gentium calls for a “submission of mind and will” to Church authority; such a notion is, quite frankly, terrifying. What happens when the Pope turns out to be an ecclesiastical politician with concubines and illegitimate children (as some of them were during the Middle Ages)? What happens when the Church heirarchy harbors pedophiles and bishops who seek to hide such crimminals from the laity? My “guiding moral light” would be extinguished because I placed my faith in an ultmately fallible (not referring to ex-cathedra) human, and I would have nowhere to turn.

Please don’t think I’m trying ot burst your bubble concerning your gratitude at being able to trust in a figure of morality and truth. Such an attitude is exactly what I would like to have. Historical evidence, skepticism, and a knowledge of human limitations, however, keep me from whole-heartedly doing so. Any thoughts?
Code: 
                  In Christ,
Chris
 
Hi There:
I’d love to place my faith in the hands of an infallible Church leader as well. The Pope can definitively answer quesions with which all Christians struggle, and in doing so, provide a sense of unity that is unavailable to Protestants or Orthodox
Click to expand...
Amen and Amen!
Lumen Gentium calls for a “submission of mind and will” to Church authority; such a notion is, quite frankly, terrifying. What happens when the Pope turns out to be an ecclesiastical politician with concubines and illegitimate children (as some of them were during the Middle Ages)? What happens when the Church heirarchy harbors pedophiles and bishops who seek to hide such crimminals from the laity?
Click to expand...
Therein a problem…which they seem to minimize.
Historical evidence, skepticism, and a knowledge of human limitations, however, keep me from whole-heartedly doing so.
Click to expand...
…Not to mention the absence of any explicit guarantee of infalibility given to any individual bishop in Scripture or the early Church writings…which they seem to not acknowledge.

Blessings

Serafin
 
Yes, I think you’re right in my idealism. I want to suggest the item on the homepage of the Catholic Answers webpage called SCANDAL IN THE CHURCH. I think it’s wonderful and have printed it to give to my Catholic friends and non-Catholics alike. Check it out: catholic.com/library/A_Crisis_of_Saints.asp

Let me know if it helps at all, it helped me. I definitely have faith in the Church and am still flying high on the grace received from my confirmation in February 2004. MT 16:18-19 gives me great peace: *And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. * It’s true we are sinners and will fail from time to time, but your faith is in God’s promise in guiding the Church will always prevail. Remember the definition of faith from Heb 11:1 *Faith is the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen. *You may also think this is too simplistic, but I remember reading another Bible passage that God wants us to come to him with the faith of children as He is our Father I just can’t recall it offhand…sorry. 👋 Check out that link above …it’s super.
 
Convert,
Thanks for the awesome link. I read some of it, and it addresses the current crisis in a very Christian and humble manner. I have to write a paper now, but I’ll read the rest of later and get back to you.
Code: 
                 In Christ,
Chris
 
The Pope can be a serial killer who sleeps with another women every night…and still the Catholic faith is not compromised. Our faith does not depend on the personal morality of any individual, even the pope…that’s what’s so amazing. Despite scandal, despit corruption, despite wicked leaders, the Church has and never will fall because of Christ! “…and the gates of hades shall never prevail against it.” Remember, papal infallibility is a special charisma given by the Holy Spirit to the pope to ensure that the faithful are never led astray, that the Church faithfully hands down the deposit of faith (remember how important maintaing sound doctrine was to Paul!). Papal infallibility simply ensures that the pope will be prevented from ever teaching, as binding on the Universal Church, a heresy. He can believe doctrines that are incorrect. He can talk to his friends and even write in support of false doctrines…he can be immoral and unfaithful; however, when he speaks ‘ex cathreda’, in his official capacity as Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, on a matter of Faith and Morals, the matter is settled. The Spirit will not allow Christ’s Church to defect.
 
Serafin:
*Honorious and the Borgia Popes, Theodora and Marozia Theophylact were not mythical figures! * I assume you realize that impeccability is a very different thing from infallibility; that popes can be heretics (unlikely, but possible) and the worst sinners on earth—but the Spirit will prevent them from officially teaching, as binding on the Universal Church, false doctrine. So then, if you are suggesting that these popes officially taught heresy, you are incorrect. No one has been able to demonstrate that any pope officially taught heresy. Please find any heretical quotes from the officially ‘ex catedra’ statements of these popes.

Popular catholicism is a different breed from the catechism kind. … talk with an average Hispanic catholic about their faith and pious practices…try to keep a straight face
The beliefs of individuals within the Church has no bearing on the truth of the official teachings. The Anglican Church has 70 000 000 members, but that’s assuming that the majority of the English nation are Anglican Christians. Do you think that the average Joe in England actually believes everything your church teaches? England is quite a secular nation, in reality. I don’t remember exact numbers, but isn’t it something like 80% of the English are baptized Anglicans, yet only 5 or 9% attend church on a regular basis?

The Pope , the Magisterium, Tradition and Scripture sound great for converts to the RCC…a little overated if you ask me. The Orthodox have managed to stay Christian without the fist two as have many Anglicans and a myriad of others. "
Perhaps stayed Christian, but why are the Anglican bishops still undecided over the issue of same-sex marriages and the like? There is no supreme authority to ensure the faithful maintaining of the deposit of faith. (And even with the Orthodox, some of them now support contraception).

Before you join, ask some former Roman Catholics why they left(and are still leaving at a rate of 20,000 a month in Latin America).
Before you dismiss the Catholic Church, ask the tens of thousands of Protestants who have come home to Rome why they have done so. The Church is losing members, true…but there are millions of nominal Catholics, in some ways a faithful remnant is better than a mass of lukewarm Christians (I’m not saying all who leave were lukewarm, I’m making a point)…as well many of these Hispanics do not properly understand their own faith. In Latin America, it is part of the culture. Everyone is born into the Church, but obviously not everyone will naturally accept it for themselves. In such a situation, it should be expected that many will not be devout. There’s been so much scandal in the news, yet the Church is still growing. 150 000 converts (about half of them Protestants) joined the Church this Easter Vigil a few weeks back in the United States alone. I can’t confirm this, but someone on this board mentioned that somewhere around a million Africans convert to the Catholic faith every year (this would make sense…Catholicism is really growing in Africa, up 150% during the reign of His Holiness John Paul II, which also would include a high birth rate and infant baptisms admittedly).
 
Wonderful Questions and God Bless you on your Journey Home.

As far as the pope having too much power remember he is only infallible in matters of faith and morals and the church has always held that she is under the word of God. No pope can institute any doctrine that is contrary to scripture. Christ guaranteed that his Spirit would guard the church from the gates of hell. That does not mean that there won’t be bad people in the church. Look at David and Peter. Christ still used sinful men to do infallible work i.e. the writing of scripture itself. Presumabley all of scriptures earthly authors were sinners. That did not prevent God from rendering there work infallible. The church teaches that the institution of the papacy is an extension of that guardianship so that the same truth that was given to the apostles and the first christians can be given to you, without adulteration. The church also teaches that there is no more public revelation.
 
40.png
fulloftruth:
The church teaches that the institution of the papacy is an extension of that guardianship so that the same truth that was given to the apostles and the first christians can be given to you, without adulteration. The church also teaches that there is no more public revelation.
Click to expand...
A lot of what both of you said makes sense; I agree with the idea thtat God chooses to work through limited, fallible, and sinful human beings in the exercise of his authority through the Church. Two more questions, though: aren’t relatively recent doctrines like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption ones which, according to Catholic thought, have been slowly ‘revealed’ as part of the deposit of faith? If this is the case, how could the Apostles have believed in such a doctrine if it only recently became dogma? If they did believe in it, why wouldn’t they declare it to be doctrine sooner? Also, what do you mean by ‘public revelation?’ Why is there no more of it? I know these are a lot of questions, and I really appreciate your your patience!

In Christ,

Chris
 
40.png
Thepeug:
I’m uncomfortable with the idea of checking reason and common sense at the door when it comes to Church authority. Lumen Gentium calls for a “submission of mind and will” to Church authority; such a notion is, quite frankly, terrifying.
Click to expand...
If the Church were just a human organization, then you would be right in being terrified. If, OTOH, the Church is really a supernatural organism, the Body and Bride of Christ, then submitting your mind and will to the Church is simply submitting them to Christ. “…unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven”.

I liken this submission to being placed in a great wilderness park. There are beauties galore, but there are also many dangerous places. The Church simply puts yellow tape across the dangerous places, and when we submit to the Church we are acknowledging that the places behind the tape are in fact dangerous, no matter how innocent or even inviting they may look. Just as in everyday life I don’t begrudge fences and warnings that keep me from blundering into danger (I submit to them also), I don’t begrudge the Church’s fences and warnings either. In fact, I’m quite grateful for them.
What happens when the Pope turns out to be an ecclesiastical politician with concubines and illegitimate children (as some of them were during the Middle Ages)?
Click to expand...
They are still prevented from teaching error, for they cannot bind heaven to error. They are not prevented from committing error.
 
40.png
Thepeug:
…aren’t relatively recent doctrines like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption ones which, according to Catholic thought, have been slowly ‘revealed’ as part of the deposit of faith? If this is the case, how could the Apostles have believed in such a doctrine if it only recently became dogma?
Click to expand...
How recent is too recent? Did the Apostles believe in the doctrine of the Trinity?

If you read the papal documents on the dogmas you mention, you will see many references to early writings in the Church supporting them. Many dogmas and doctrines are only officially proclaimed when there arises opposition to or confusion about them.
 
Mike,

I really like your analogy with the park. I guess it all boils down to what you really believe; if the Catholic Church is the Body of Christ, then submission to its authority is the only sensible thing. That’s not necessarily what I believe, but I’m speaking hypothetically. Your response to ‘recent’ doctrines raises another question, but I’m going to start a new thread on it. Also, can you or anyone else define “public revelation”? Thanks for the help!

God bless,

Chris
 
Public Revelation is when the Spirit would give a new aspect of the Divine Revelation (a prophecy, a new doctrine, etc) as binding on the entire Church. This ended at the close of the apostolic era. At that point, the entire deposit of faith had been entrusted to the Church. However, the Church is guided by the Spirit, and over time can come to a greater and fuller understanding of certain aspects of the deposit of faith. As well, doctrines are only officially defined, as said above, when it seems appropriate, or when people are contesting the notion, or to counter a new heresy. The Assumption was defined after many Catholics (lay and clerics) asked to the Pope to do so. The Immaculate Conception may not have been explicitly present in the early teachings of the Church, but it is an extension, a logical ramification, of the teaching of the early Fathers that Mary is the “Second” or “New” Eve (Eve was created sinless). There are many complex papers out there on the development of doctrine (this concept of the Spirit guiding the Church to a fuller understanding of Divine Revelation). I can hunt some down for you if you like.
 
twf,

Thanks for the explanation about public revelation. Concerning the development of doctrine, omeone gave me some excerpts from a paper by Henry Cardinal Newman that help explain that whole process in great detail. Suprisingly, it actually makes pretty good sense.

God bless,

Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top