Give me your best argument AGAINST becoming Catholic.

[PRmerger]

For me at this stage of my faith journey, I can’t become a practicing Catholic because I feel smothered when confined to what would be expected of me. I believe all humans have limitations in knowing the one ultimate truth so I just accept life’s mysteries and the mysteries that come with faith. I personally am more at peace when things are not arranged so neatly in a box of black and white. I like more gray. But that’s how God made me to tick. I understand others though have a different make-up and need more black and white and the need to believe they know the truth. And that’s fine. I just breathe better in a looser gray tee than in a tight fitting black or white one and just prefer wearing gray socks but others prefer wearing black or white ones. It’s just at what stage each of us are along our faith journeys. And may God bless us all as we journey in peace.

I hope you notice the irony in that almost every single one of your statements above is…a black and white statement.

 

[benhur]

Even an inheritance can only be given to the child who remains within the family bosom, and does the things that the family members are expected to do. If a child has disgraced himself and gotten disowned, or if he has estranged himself from the family because of something he disagrees with in the family code of conduct, he won’t get anything.

We are the sum of our behaviour. Someone who does bad things cannot be considered “good.”

We go round and round. One insists the other is free from necessity of works and the other chained to them. Middle ground is best.

Yes, the child must not be written out of the Book of Life. He must be perfect, satisfying the commands to every jot and tittle. Even giving all he has to the poor to be a disciple, with no envying or strife or lie in him, his righteousness exceeding that of the commandment givers. Oh yes , and meek, very meek and the poorest in spirit.

 

[benhur]

I hope you notice the irony in that almost every single one of your statements above is…a black and white statement.

Hi PR. Actually the use of black and white deals with exclusivity of the other, I think. Sy at least considers “Catholic” to be OK, like his “grey”, both on the same faith journey.

 

[benhur]

Mark 10:18

“…No one is good but God alone”.

This is why we have confession and penance. The Pharisees didn’t see this. The door is always open.

For sure why we have imputed righteousness thru gifted faith in Calvary, how else could we be perfect as He commanded ?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Hi PR. Actually the use of black and white deals with exclusivity of the other, I think. Sy at least considers “Catholic” to be OK, like his “grey”, both on the same faith journey.

 

[PRmerger]

Hi PR. Actually the use of black and white deals with exclusivity of the other, I think.

That’s what black and white means, ben. If you believe something is "black’, that NECESSARILY excludes it from being white.

Sy at least considers “Catholic” to be OK, like his “grey”, both on the same faith journey.

Oh, I am sure Sy considers Catholic to be ok. No one has posited that he didn’t.

 

[PRmerger]

That’s what black and white means, ben. If you believe something is "black’, that NECESSARILY excludes it from being white.

So, for example, in these black and white statements, Sy is EXCLUDING the contrary position from being true also.

Sy posted: “I believe all humans have limitations”…which means that he EXCLUDES the fact that any one human being is unlimited.

“… in knowing the one ultimate truth”…which means that he EXCLUDES the fact that anyone can know the one ultimate truth.

“… so I just accept life’s mysteries and the mysteries that come with faith”…which means that he EXLUDES the belief that we should reject life’s mysteries.

So, again, what Sy is reserving for himself he objects to in others: the right to see some things as black and white.

 

[Sy_Noe]

So, for example, in these black and white statements, Sy is EXCLUDING the contrary position from being true also.

Sy posted: “I believe all humans have limitations”…which means that he EXCLUDES the fact that any one human being is unlimited.

“… in knowing the one ultimate truth”…which means that he EXCLUDES the fact that anyone can know the one ultimate truth.

“… so I just accept life’s mysteries and the mysteries that come with faith”…which means that he EXLUDES the belief that we should reject life’s mysteries.

So, again, what Sy is reserving for himself he objects to in others: the right to see some things as black and white.

No PRMerger, you clearly didn’t understand. But I thought I was as clear as I could be that you have every right to see things black and white if that’s what you believe and at what stage you are on your walk. Peace.

 

[PRmerger]

No PRMerger, you clearly didn’t understand. But I thought I was as clear as I could be that you have every right to see things black and white if that’s what you believe and at what stage you are on your walk. Peace.

Fair enough. I did see that. I retract the statement that you object to others seeing things as black and white.

But let’s just make it clear that you do see some things, lots of things, as black and white.

Nothing wrong with that.

My objection to your paradigm is that you don’t seem to be willing to conform your ideas to what the Church has said. Rather, you want to re-create some sort of theology that coincides with your own personal ideologies.

That is, “I don’t believe that [fill in the blank] is wrong” therefore, coincidentally, God doesn’t either.

“I believe that [fill in the blank] is right” therefore, coincidentally, God does too.

But think about it: if you haven’t changed your own person moral convictions to conform to what God has decreed, then I posit that you may indeed just be worshipping an idealized version of yourself.

 

[PRmerger]

For me at this stage of my faith journey, I can’t become a practicing Catholic because I feel smothered when confined to what would be expected of me. I believe all humans have limitations in knowing the one ultimate truth so I just accept life’s mysteries and the mysteries that come with faith. I personally am more at peace when things are not arranged so neatly in a box of black and white. I like more gray. But that’s how God made me to tick. I understand others though have a different make-up and need more black and white and the need to believe they know the truth. And that’s fine. I just breathe better in a looser gray tee than in a tight fitting black or white one and just prefer wearing gray socks but others prefer wearing black or white ones. It’s just at what stage each of us are along our faith journeys. And may God bless us all as we journey in peace.

Here’s the absolute*** wrong way*** to go about one’s faith journey:

Seeker: Wow. I just can’t sanction the idea that God would [fill in the blank]…
Hey! You know what? I don’t believe that God really would [fill in the blank]! Cool! Everything’s copacetic now. I can still be a believer! Awesome!

We need to consider this: if there is a God, it is 100% certain that His Ways are not going to coincidence with our ways. He is going to propose some things–command, really,–that we won’t like.

And if you can’t recall a single time in your faith journey that you’ve said, “You know what? I believe [A]” but God said ** therefore I now change my POV", then you are worshipping at the god of the almighty self, rather than the almighty.

NB: Here “you” is not a personal “you” but a rhetorical “you”**

 

[benhur]

So, for example, in these black and white statements, Sy is EXCLUDING the contrary position from being true also.

That is to be discussed, not a given.

Sy posted: “I believe all humans have limitations”…which means that he EXCLUDES the fact that any one human being is unlimited.

OK

“… in knowing the one ultimate truth”…which means that he EXCLUDES the fact that anyone can know the one ultimate truth.

Well, without “limitations” or as Paul says, "thru a glass darkly, but then…crystal clear). Can’t chop up his sentence.

“… so I just accept life’s mysteries and the mysteries that come with faith”…which means that he EXLUDES the belief that we should reject life’s mysteries.

For himself only. Yes, but the next sentence expands and INCLUDES the “rejectors” further thinkers, box put in’ers.

So, again, what Sy is reserving for himself he objects to in others: the right to see some things as black and white.

Only when you chop up paragraph.
But you are right, it is this or that, and each have our black and white. His black and white is “grey,” black and white". sometimes can’t get away from truth of our own statements and nothing said is free to itself. A bit like one saying absolutely there are not absolutes.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Fair enough. I did see that. I retract the statement that you object to others seeing things as black and white.

But let’s just make it clear that you do see some things, lots of things, as black and white.

Nothing wrong with that.

My objection to your paradigm is that you don’t seem to be willing to conform your ideas to what the Church has said. Rather, you want to re-create some sort of theology that coincides with your own personal ideologies.

That is, “I don’t believe that [fill in the blank] is wrong” therefore, coincidentally, God doesn’t either.

“I believe that [fill in the blank] is right” therefore, coincidentally, God does too.

But think about it: if you haven’t changed your own person moral convictions to conform to what God has decreed, then I posit that you may indeed just be worshipping an idealized version of yourself.

Hi PRMerger, I do understand what you’re saying. And I understand when any of us are confined to our certain way, it can be upsetting when our way is questioned. That I think is human nature. We have a tendency sometimes I think, all of us, to either get into a defensive mode or up the offense. In our cases I think it just really comes down though to what we believe or believe we know God truly decreed. You simply believe you know more than I believe I can or do. It’s like I said, it’s just the stage in our faith journeys where each of us are at. Where any of us are. And there’s nothing wrong with that either. We are where we are only by the grace of God. I had previously heard of them but never had actually delved into them. But if you’ve never explored Fowler’s version or Peck’s simplified version of faith stages, another Catholic poster shared them with me and I found it extremely helpful in my understanding of myself and others. I am not on this thread to argue however. I merely answered the question the best I could from the place I’m at. Peace.

 

[PRmerger]

That is to be discussed, not a given.

No. He is excluding them from his belief system. When he says “[A] is true!” that, necessarily means “I believe that [not-A] is false” in these statements.

But you are right, it is this or that, and each have our black and white.

Yep.

 

[PRmerger]

Hi PRMerger, I do understand what you’re saying. And I understand when any of us are confined to our certain way, it can be upsetting when our way is questioned. That I think is human nature. We have a tendency sometimes I think, all of us, to either get into a defensive mode or up the offense. In our cases I think it just really comes down though to what we believe or believe we know God truly decreed. You simply believe you know more than I believe I can or do. It’s like I said, it’s just the stage in our faith journeys where each of us are at. Where any of us are. And there’s nothing wrong with that either. We are where we are only by the grace of God. I had previously heard of them but never had actually delved into them. But f you’ve never explored Fowler’s version or Peck’s simplified version of faith stages, another Catholic poster shared them with me and I found it extremely helpful in my understanding of myself and others. Peace.

Has there been a time where you’ve conformed your views to what the Church has said, despite your own personal preference that something else be true?

In my case, I would absolutely LOVE it if I could celebrate my girlfriends’ second marriages with them. I was at their first weddings to LOSERS, and my own personal belief is that their new sweethearts are wonderful men.

But, alas, I cannot change the words of Christ, and he said that divorce and re-marriage is adultery, so now I conform my views to Christ.

Not my preference, but I understand that I can’t just make up how I want to rule the world.

What about you? Can you acknowledge a time when you’ve done this? Conformed your view despite what your own personal wishes would be?

 

[PRmerger]

I am not on this thread to argue however.

Well, in one sense everyone who responds to another post is here to “argue”. Argue simply means offer apologia for your position while considering the other position and either accepting or rejecting it.

However, 'tis true that no one ought to be argumentative, or quarreling here.

But without arguing in the former sense, all this forum would be would be this:

“I agree!”
“Me too!”
“You are right!”
“Too true! Too true!”

And how ridiculous would that type of discussion be?

 

[guanophore]

Can you receive it before you are “transformed” ?

Yes, because the Apostles taught that He has provided everyone with sufficient grace to be saved. Catholics call this prevenient or drawing grace.

Do not see the word "merit'' used by you here.

No. While we were yet sinners, He died for us. We are separated from Him by sin, and since was are not in right relationship with him, there is nothing we can do of ourselves to “merit” anything. Only after we are justified by grace, through faith, can we produce any deeds that befit repentance.

What we discuss here are just what are* His ways He has prescribed for us *in order to receive His grace. Just want to make sure how conditional you make grace.

In order to walk in the ways He has prescribed for us, we must already BE in a state of grace. We cannot enter a state of grace without grace, so I think you lost me here on “conditionnal”.

People are not saved against their will, if that is what you mean. A choice must be made - faith must be placed in Christ, what Jesus called “the work of God”.

.Sometimes. Some get the same favor whether they have 4 works as like the one who has 8 works. Yes walking in the Spirit is always best.

 

[benhur]

No. He is excluding them from his belief system. When he says “[A] is true!” that, necessarily means “I believe that [not-A] is false” in these statements.
Yep.

All I take from him is that he has less black and white , dogamtized truth’s as compared to “others”/Catholics. All have some mysteries and things "open ended’’. Maybe he has 88 solid truths and CC 102. Maybe he is closer to the Nicene Creeds than to Council of Trent declarations or Vat 1 or 2. My “A” exclusive view is that the lower the number, the more universal to all.

 

[PRmerger]

My “A” exclusive view is that the lower the number, the more universal to all.

So having 1 universal truth would be the best?

 

[benhur]

Well, in one sense everyone who responds to another post is here to “argue”. Argue simply means offer apologia for your position while considering the other position and either accepting or rejecting it.

However, 'tis true that no one ought to be argumentative, or quarreling here.

But without arguing in the former sense, all this forum would be would be this:

“I agree!”
“Me too!”
“You are right!”
“Too true! Too true!”

And how ridiculous would that type of discussion be?

Don’t forget, **“Cool !”. **

 

[benhur]

So having 1 universal truth would be the best?

No, the best would be whatever my number is. Of course a whole qualifying paragraph could follow and I saw "our’’ /your question coming forth. By itself my first statement would show the weakness of "universality/catholicity.