How have lukewarm, lapsed, compromising Catholics affected your faith walk?

[fix]

with all this talk about the definition of “serious” then I guess CAF is in error for calling their voters guide for “serious” Catholics (of even their one of Christians) in error?

SOMEone has to define what a “serious” Catholic is (we all know what a "cafeteria Catholic is and what they represent), otherwise we’d be nothing more than the people that are always telling us “Well, religion has nothing to do with it. It’s all about your relationship with Christ” yet they’re missing the boat entirely. Eh?

Right. It can become almost a type of political correctness gone wild. We no longer use language correctly as one will claim offense.

It seems the OP was using the chosen adjectives to measure words and actions against Church teaching, not himself. We must have a yardstick or touchstone to see if our actions and beliefs are correct.

For example would it be fair to say, in general, that Mother Teresa was a more serious Catholic than a Senator who votes for abortion and claims a primacy of conscience over the Church? Is the OP not asking how these types of things effect our journey of faith?

 

[setter]

with all this talk about the definition of “serious” then I guess CAF is in error for calling their voters guide for “serious” Catholics (of even their one of Christians) in error?

SOMEone has to define what a “serious” Catholic is (we all know what a "cafeteria Catholic is and what they represent), otherwise we’d be nothing more than the people that are always telling us “Well, religion has nothing to do with it. It’s all about your relationship with Christ” yet they’re missing the boat entirely. Eh?

In retrospect, I realize now that a rough definition of “serious Catholic” to facilitate a more constructive discussion would have been helpful. I was actually thinking of the CA “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics” title when considering the wording for my OP. The only way one can define a “serious Catholic” is by way of contradistinction.

In deference to my OP, I would posit this working definition of a “serious Catholic”: One who is more conformed and transformed in adherence to and willful embrace of the faith as instructed to us by the Church in matters of faith and morals. This is in contrast with a “non-serious Catholic” who manifest lukewarmness in word or deed, displays compromise in matters of faith and morals, and lapsed participation in the formal sacraments, for whatever reason, though capable on knowing better.

Anyone having issues with my OP should then have similiar issues with the folks who created the CA voter’s guide.

I appreciate the thoughtful responses from those who stayed on topic.

 

[a_cermak]

I think you’re being a bit on the facetious side of this issue… If you hold the opinion that ABC and abortion is ok, you are more than likely inclined to either do it/ use it or advise a friend (possibly even Catholic) to do it/ use it simply because your “opinion” sees nothing wrong with it. Does that make sense?

It’s ok to have an opinion, but on the more serious things the Catholic Church is so obviously dead set against… THAT’s where my problem lies. I’m not talking about my best friends’ nail color here, she wants red, I want coral. My mothers’ OPINION is that abortion is ok. My mothers’ OPINION is that birth control is ok. Both of those opinions are directly against what the Church teaches. So what other teachings of the Church does her opinion go against? (And sometimes I wonder why I grew up not knowing alot about the Church and what She teaches… well, now I know why)

I don’t go out bashing people on their opinions. But when they express one that is in direct contrast to what the Church teaches, yes… I will try to correct them as gently as I can. And trust me when I say if they get stubborn, I can play that game too.

We’re called to help each other… so how do you know you’re doing something wrong, or even if your opinion is wrongly formed, if no one says anything to you?

No, it wasn’t facetious. I was legitimately curious about whether holding opposing opinions to the Church’s teachings was a sin. I know acting against the Church’s Dogma and Doctrine is a sin, but that involves an action. On the other hand Scripture does mention the lustful thoughts being as bad as the real thing, so perhaps it is sinful not to give full positive assent to all the Church’s teachings.

 

[Nordar]

Setter I want to thank you for starting this thread it was a good one for me… Wanting to become more involved in my Faith/my Church/people in my Church. I joined The Alter Rosary Society, I saw some of these women at daily Mass all the time. They are really nice ladies, I have gone to several meetings. I have also been going to a Catechist class that the Pastor of the Church has been giving for the past 10 weeks at Our Church. I am not even going to go into what some of these women have said they believe to be OK for Catholics the past 9 weeks. Today, General confession is fine in fact they would much preferr it. After all they do it in a lot of Churches in some parts of the Country. When I pointed out that it was wrong and against The Magisterium their reply was “Oh but they got permission from The Bishops it’s fine”. Instead of drinking the blood out of the Chalace because it spreads germs it should be drunk out of individual paper cups like they do in The Lutheran Church. There was others but you get the drift, these women are daily communicants, they are at catechism classes I would say looking at them they are as serious as I am about their Faith. So how do they not know that General Confession is a NO NO and I do? really the whole thing just has me scratching me head.

 

[Pug]

I was legitimately curious about whether holding opposing opinions to the Church’s teachings was a sin.

I’m not good with identifying different categories of sin, but you might be talking about “incredulity”. In their inward self, the person willfully refuses to assent to the teaching. Or, I suppose “voluntary doubt” might be it. They are both in the CCC right by heresy as sins against faith.

We are required to assent. We are not allowed to withhold it in the case of a truth of the faith. (we must have religious assent to some other things as well). We can, however, say that we do not know how the Church arrives at the issue. You can think, “I don’t understand the reason why adultery is wrong.” You cannot think, “adultery is just fine, but I won’t do adultery or tell others to do it.”

 

[BLB_Oregon]

As far as I know, Our Lord and His Blessed Mother are the only ones in the Body of Christ who haven’t been lukewarm, lapsed, or compromising at some time or another.

What’s the question, exactly? Is the OP implying that “serious” Catholics imagine that they have made their houses of reinforced glass?

This is not the way the Desert Fathers talked. Let’s stay away from it.

 

[porriwiggle]

… these women are daily communicants, they are at catechism classes I would say looking at them they are as serious as I am about their Faith. So how do they not know that General Confession is a NO NO and I do? really the whole thing just has me scratching me head.

I think this is where I came in. The majority of Catholics, good genuine people who are serious about their faith, only know what their priest teaches them. I myself was quite happy about general absolution until a priest friend of mine corrected me. Before that it would not have occurred to me that any priest could be wrong about such things.

It is very easy to just go with the flow, It is nice and safe and comfortable, and they have it on the best possible authority (their priest) that everything is ok. How can people know the truth if they are taught wrongly by their priests.

I’m not saying that it is always the priest’s fault, obviously it isn’t, people will go on believing what the want to, but when you can have a priest who tells you at Mass “never mind the bread and wine, that’s not what we are here for”, is it any wonder that some people have the wrong idea about their faith.

 

[setter]

It seems the OP was using the chosen adjectives to measure words and actions against Church teaching, not himself. We must have a yardstick or touchstone to see if our actions and beliefs are correct.

For example would it be fair to say, in general, that Mother Teresa was a more serious Catholic than a Senator who votes for abortion and claims a primacy of conscience over the Church? Is the OP not asking how these types of things effect our journey of faith?

That was intent of my OP. Obviously some folks took it the wrong way and misconstrued my intentions out of their own bias. Even after I attempted to clarify my intentions:

Originally Posted by** setter **
I do not mean to imply any disrespect or offense or convey any pride or judgmentalism.

…some folks additionally took it upon themselves to assail me personally. I am left wondering if it is not the virtue of charity which cuts across the entire spectrum of serious to non-serious Catholics as the distinguishing hallmark of what it means to be a disciple of Christ. Charity properly understood as encompassing the mercy and truth of God, and enough humility to receive and to speak the truth in love to a wayward brother/sister in the Lord.

CHARITY. defn; The infused supernatural virtue by which a person loves God above all things for his own sake, and loves others for God’s sake. It is a virtue based on divine faith or in belief in God’s revealed truth, and is not acquired by mere human effort. It can be conferred only by divine grace. Because it is infused along with sanctifying grace, it is frequently identified with the state of grace. Therefore, a person who has lost the supernatural virtue of charity has lost the state of grace, although he may still possess the virtues of hope and faith. therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl

 

[fix]

Setter I want to thank you for starting this thread it was a good one for me… Wanting to become more involved in my Faith/my Church/people in my Church. I joined The Alter Rosary Society, I saw some of these women at daily Mass all the time. They are really nice ladies, I have gone to several meetings. I have also been going to a Catechist class that the Pastor of the Church has been giving for the past 10 weeks at Our Church. I am not even going to go into what some of these women have said they believe to be OK for Catholics the past 9 weeks. Today, General confession is fine in fact they would much preferr it. After all they do it in a lot of Churches in some parts of the Country. When I pointed out that it was wrong and against The Magisterium their reply was “Oh but they got permission from The Bishops it’s fine”. Instead of drinking the blood out of the Chalace because it spreads germs it should be drunk out of individual paper cups like they do in The Lutheran Church. There was others but you get the drift, these women are daily communicants, they are at catechism classes I would say looking at them they are as serious as I am about their Faith. So how do they not know that General Confession is a NO NO and I do? really the whole thing just has me scratching me head.

Your experience is similar to mine. That, in fact, is what drew me to this site in the first place. We all are sinners and we all struggle. A serious Catholic is not one who does not sin, but it is also not one who goes through all the motions outwardly while rejecting many of the things we are called to believe.

Can we imagine claiming we are serious Catholics while stating we have no obligation to the poor or oppressed? Certainly that would draw all types of criticisms.

 

[Nordar]

I’m not saying that it is always the priest’s fault, obviously it isn’t, people will go on believing what the want to, but when you can have a priest who tells you at Mass “never mind the bread and wine, that’s not what we are here for”, is it any wonder that some people have the wrong idea about their faith.

I’m not sure what it is, I moved back to this Parish after living someplace else for a few years. When i did they had a new Priest who at his masses would stop and bring all the children up on The Alter just before he would consecrate The Body and Blood. I know this is a liturgical Abuse but eveyone in this Parish seemed to think this was just Hunkey Dorey and Oh so cute.

Fastforeword about 2 months after I am here I don’t see this happening any more. I join The Rosary Society and they are all in a frenzy writing a letter to The Bishop apparently about this one man in the parish who is harrassing The Priest. Yes he is the reason the children are no longer going up on The Alter he himself wrote a letter to The Bishop about The abuse and some others he felt were happening. There is one lady going on about how she has been a Catholic for 60 something yrs had 12 yrs of Catholic school blah blah blah. If Fr wants to have the children on the Alter one man in The Parish is not going to stop it. None of them even had any idea that this WAS a Liturgical abuse. I dared to say well technically he is right it is an abuse it is in The GIRM. They said well they do it in other Parishes. that is always their pat answers like that means it is Ok. Now I want to point out here that these women are the ones who are teaching catechism classes to the children of the Parish and Religious Education. This is by no means a small Parish. It is in The Diocese of Rockville Centre

 

[fix]

INow I want to point out here that these women are the ones who are teaching catechism classes to the children of the Parish and Religious Education. This is by no means a small Parish. It is in The Diocese of Rockville Centre

Exactly the problem the OP seems to be pointing out. How do we grow in holiness when the very place we should encounter orthodoxy and help has folks in positions of authority teaching things contrary to the faith?

Does that mean you, or the OP, are perfect people without sin? Of course not. It does mean some folks discern things are out of whack and they have a desire to seek what is right.

 

[Nordar]

Your experience is similar to mine. That, in fact, is what drew me to this site in the first place. We all are sinners and we all struggle. A serious Catholic is not one who does not sin, but it is also not one who goes through all the motions outwardly while rejecting many of the things we are called to believe.

Can we imagine claiming we are serious Catholics while stating we have no obligation to the poor or oppressed? Certainly that would draw all types of criticisms.

I’m sorry but I don’t see where this has anything to do with what I said. What does what I said have anything to do with the poor and oppressed?

What I said was I do not understand how some who seem to be serious Catholics do not know that things they believe in are Liturgical Abuses. And I do.

 

[fix]

I’m sorry but I don’t see where this has anything to do with what I said. What does what I said have anything to do with the poor and oppressed?

I was pointing out your legitimate concern for orthodox teaching. I agree with you, others may think that the onus should be only on you and not to worry about the fact teaching is in error.

I was making a point about the phrase serious Catholic. The phrase does not mean without sin. It should mean one who lives the faith, assents to all that the Church teaches and accepts they sin and they seek forgiveness.

What I said was I do not understand how some who seem to be serious Catholics do not know that things they believe in are Liturgical Abuses. And I do.

Yes, I agree with you.

 

[Nordar]

Exactly the problem the OP seems to be pointing out. How do we grow in holiness when the very place we should encounter orthodoxy and help has folks in positions of authority teaching things contrary to the faith?

Does that mean you, or the OP, are perfect people without sin? Of course not. It does mean some folks discern things are out of whack and they have a desire to seek what is right.

I think you are doing a great job of twisting what people are saying on here,. It is one of the main reason why I always hesitate to post. NO I do not think it is the the problem the OP is pointing out. I think you are taking what this OP is saying personal for some reason.

Who said anything about myself or the OP being perfect people without sin? Again My posts were about people not knowing about Liturgical Abuses I am questioning that. I don’t understand your need to twist my post and the OP’s around.

 

[fix]

I think you are doing a great job of twisting what people are saying on here,. It is one of the main reason why I always hesitate to post. NO I do not think it is the the problem the OP is pointing out. I think you are taking what this OP is saying personal for some reason.

Who said anything about myself or the OP being perfect people without sin? Again My posts were about people not knowing about Liturgical Abuses I am questioning that. I don’t understand your need to twist my post and the OP’s around.

Perhaps I am too nuanced here. I am not twisting anything you are saying. I was using your posts to help refute what others have said about the OP intentions.

 

[Nordar]

Fix sorry I total misunderstood what you were saying you can see I deleted that thread but you got it before I deleted it for some reason I just read them wrong.

 

[fix]

Fix sorry I total misunderstood what you were saying you can see I deleted that thread but you got it before I deleted it for some reason I just read them wrong.

No problem. I was starting to confuse myself. Sometimes I am not as clear as I should be.

 

[Cathy]

I’d like to address the meaning of the original question. The meaning I read into the question is “Am I my brother’s keeper?” I don’t think this question applies only to the physical life of my brother, but also to his spiritual life.

In a talk, I recently heard St. Paul spoken of as “arrogant,” because of his desire to evengelize the world. Rather than arrogant, I think St. Paul was deeply repentant of his former arrogance (when he was willing to kill Christians because of their beliefs), and trying with all his heart to be humbly obedient to God.

I have reason to believe I killed one of my unborn children by use of “the pill.” When I received the Sacrament of Reconciliation for the first time at age 45, I felt as if 40 pounds of physical weight lifted off my shoulders. My 7-year process of conversion and entry into the Church began with a faithful Catholic handing me an article about the effects of contraception, and the viewpoint of the Church. But she didn’t stop at that. She and her family prayed for me every day.

In turn, I want to pray for God’s beloved lost and deceived children (some of them, Catholic) who are merely surviving, but not really living the joyful life God intends for them. I spend a lot of my God-given time and money reaching out to people who don’t yet appreciate the beauty and consolation of the Church’s moral teachings.

On a very few incredibly beautiful occasions, I have been able to hold in my arms the fruit of God’s good work he prepared for me to walk in.

Yes, we are our brothers’ keeper. And what a blessing that is!

 

[wjp984]

it is not the people that bother me it is the liberal priests who try to convince me that certain sins are alright to do or not mortal. It is no wonder that people are cafeteria Catholics since a sizeable amount of priests encourage it or maybe not encourage but don’t discourage and say it is alright.

 

[Magicsilence]

AMEN AMEN

I could not disagree more.

My faith is affected by others. When our retired bishop comes in to our Church to celebrate mass, and he is forceful with the message of the gospel, and only sugarcoats it a little, then it inspires me. When he pronounces the consecration with real feeling, it inspires me.

If Catholic laity and especially clergy are all lukewarm in their appearances/speech then to a revert it can SEEM that they have no one to turn to.

However, the longer life goes on, the more I learn to see Christ through appearances, and remember that I would have hated to be judged just when I began to take an interest in my faith.

God Bless,