I just cannot get over this one issue...and it's keeping me from being Catholic

[JRKH]

jinc1019,

Been thinking some more about you dilemma and wanted to ask…And I’m assuming that your trouble with infallible church does not extend to scripture…In other words you fully accept that the Holy Scriptures contain no error…

So I just want to ask what part of this gives you trouble…
…tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church let him be as a tax collector. 18 "Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
Mt 18:17-18
I mean - to me this seems pretty darn clear…Do you see something in Scripture that seems to countermand this??

Peace
James

 

[pablope]

Hi James,
You made an excellent point about corruption and law…you are absolutely right on that issue; corruption in the Church does NOT really have anything to do with the authority of the Church.

Protestants deny the Church’s authority in order to get around these other issues, but they derive their authority solely from the Bible, which was created by the Church, and ignores 2000 years of Church tradition (not to mention the Eucharist), so I am certainly not an advocate for their way of things.

(ex.: The Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, the Eucharist, etc.). Things like contraception, female priests, etc. do not seem to me to be as clear as the first category, even though both groups are placed under the heading of “faith and morals.” For me, the Church can have a position on anything and that is totally fine, but they should only be saying a teaching on an issue is infallible if they are 100% certain that this is what Jesus wants and I am not sure that is always the case. Now I know the argument against it, and I understand that most people on this forum believe Jesus granted the authority to the Church to make these decisions, but this is ultimately a matter of faith based on very broad statements in the Bible and Church tradition, which should not be discunted at all, but for me, it’s hard to deal with. I will pray about it as I do every night and hope for clarity. Thanks again, as always.

Hopefully this article will enlighten you further…and give some more to think about…calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/

Apart from the Church, I had conceived of faith in Christ as something entirely inward. But upon coming to understand that Christ founded a visible hierarchically organized Body of which He is the Head and which He promised to preserve, I came to see that the way to trust Christ is to trust His Church of which He is the Head, just as the early Christians trusted Christ precisely by trusting the teaching of the Apostles. Trusting the Apostles did not subtract from (or compete with) their trust in Christ. On the contrary, when Jesus tells the Apostle Thomas, “Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed,”29 He implies that greater faith is required and shown in those who trust in Christ not by seeing Him, but by believing the testimony of the Apostles. Jesus refers to this way of believing when He prays, “I do not ask in behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word.”30

When we come to see “the act of faith in Christ and the act of faith in the Church [as] one act of faith,” then we have to let go of ecclesial deism. In that respect ecclesial deism is a ‘hermeneutic of suspicion,’ a form of unbelief, a stance of doubt, and hence a defect in faith. But that does not mean that everyone holding some form of ecclesial deism is doing so because he or she consciously or culpably distrusts Christ. It may simply be because this person does not recognize or grasp what it is that Christ founded when He founded His Church. In the history of the Church, we can find this stance of doubt in the early heresies, including the Montanists, Novatians, and Donatists. Their distrust expressed itself as distrusting the legitimate shepherds whom Christ had appointed to feed and govern His flock. But the Catholic exercises faith in Christ by trusting and serving those shepherds whom Christ has appointed and authorized to govern in His name. In doing so, the Catholic is not replacing faith in Christ with faith in the Church, but trusting in Christ precisely by and through trusting Christ’s Church.

St. Irenaeus speaks of this charism when he writes:

They [the bishops] have received the certain charism of the truth * according to the pleasure of the Father, with the succession in the office of bishop.33

The Church has this charism because the Church is the Body of Christ, and He, the Truth, is the Head of the Body. That ontological reality underlies Christ’s promise that the gates of Hades will never prevail against His Church,34 that His Holy Spirit will guide her into all truth,35 and that He will be with her to the end of the age,36. It underlies the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth.37

The indefectibility of the Church is a gift from Christ to the Church by which she is preserved to the end of the age as the “institution of salvation.” She can neither perish from the world nor depart from “her teaching, her constitution and her liturgy.”38 The gift of indefectibility does not imply that the members of the Church, even members of the Magisterium, cannot sin or err. But it does entail that the Magisterium of the Church can never lose or corrupt any part of the revelation of Christ, which includes both matters theological and moral. This gift of indefectibility is essential to Christ’s purpose in establishing His Church as the means of continuing His saving work to all the nations and peoples of the world until the end of the age. Regarding this purpose, Pope Leo XIII wrote, “What did Christ the Lord achieve by the foundation of the Church; what did He wish? This: He wished to delegate to the Church the same office and the same mandate which He had Himself received from the Father in order to continue them.”39*

 

[Crumpy]

First of all, let me just put my life in perspective (I think that is an important part of this equation) so that you can understand where I am coming from before outlining the major thing keeping me away from really engaging myself in the Church. I am 24-years-old, currently in law school, married (in the Catholic Church), and I have always been a very spiritual person. I grew up in a Catholic middle class home in a rural town in the middle of New Hampshire, but my parents never really taught me the ins and outs of the Catholic faith, and my father, who still identifies himself as Catholic, does not completely accept the Church and believes other religions have some small amounts of faith to offer. I went to Sunday school growing, was in the choir, and never really understood what it all meant.

Once I got older, I was still very spiritual; I prayed every night, but I didn’t get too involved in thinking about whether Jesus was actually God or just a moral teacher, whether Protestants are valid as a sect of Christianity, etc. Then, however, I met my wife…and my new-found father-in-law, a devout Catholic, encouraged me to look in various directions to help find my faith. Over time, I slowly (agonizingly so) found answers to most (nearly all) of my very difficult questions. I started not even believing in Jesus as God and have now come to the point where I not only believe that Jesus was God, but also believe He intended for a universal church that would distribute the Eucharist, which I believe to be the supernatural manna of the New Testament. I have read countless scholars and arguments regarding various levels of the faith, and that long journey has led me to a place where I am firm in my faith, which happens to be the Catholic faith. I even read atheistic former evangelicals like Bart Ehrman, whose works I found ironically pushing me toward the Catholic Church as well.

For starters, let me begin by saying that I believe in everything in the Nicene Creed…but one primary issue, which is attached to numerous other issues as well, has kept me from going to Church, from finally being confirmed, and from truly accepting the Catholic Church.

I call this problem my “filler issue,” because it directly relates to all of the Church stances made to “fill in” what Jesus did not directly address. For instance, on the issue of birth control, Jesus never directly addresses this (for obvious reasons) and nowhere can it be implied or seen that a married couple cannot use birth control or that sex should only be to create children and not as an expression of love between two married people. This is only ONE example, but there are many, many, many issues. Women being allowed to be priests is yet another. Confession is one as well. Nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus suggest the Church’s role is to engage in these activities. I know confessional powers was given directly to the apostles AFTER the resurrection, but it doesn’t say priests 2,000 years later should have the same power. The Catholic Church has addressed these issues and insists many of them are inferred from the actions of Jesus, but I have trouble buying that argument. I guess in the end, my primary issue is accepting the Catholic Church’s role as creating NEW doctrine. I know why I should trust the Church’s stances on the issues relating directly to Jesus and the Old Testament, but I cannot bring myself to accept Church doctrine that was created by the Church alone, and I often wonder if the Church should be creating new doctrine or simply defending the doctrines handed down to them by Jesus and developing those further. I am NOT saying that Church does not have the authority to further develop ideas passed down by Jesus…the Trinity is an example of Church doctrine developed by the Church BASED on the teachings of Jesus. But contraception in married relationships doesn’t fit anywhere in that model because it’s not even based on what Jesus taught, and the Church’s position on women being priests makes little sense to me as well.

I believe Jesus established the Catholic Church, but with what mission? To create new doctrine as well as defend and develop original New Testament teachings? I am not so sure. I don’t know that Jesus ever intended for his Church to truly be making decisions only God could make. This is at the heart of my problem. I don’t know if I can be apart of the Catholic community truly because I don’t know if I can ever accept the Church’s role of creating new doctrine and then treating it as though it came directly from Jesus. Clearly the Church has made many mistakes in the past so not every decision it makes is what Jesus wants. If anyone can help me with this problem, I would greatly, greatly appreciate it. God bless.

What can I add to over 100 responses to your question? Well, this. Read Tradition and the Church by Msgr. George Agius. It is too detailed (and rich) to summarize in a post. But, I think you can’t read it and NOT want to join the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church is the ONE church of Jesus Christ.

There’s a lot of scripture you have to dismiss to arrive at any other conclusion.

Anticipating the blessed outcome, welcome to the Catholic Church.

 

[Abu]

jinc1019 #98
While I agree that the Church was given authority to teach about Jesus, the category of faith and morals has expanded a great deal over the history of the Church to include things, as we talked about before, like modern contraception…and that expansion is what really concerns me.
I just don’t ever know if I will be convinced that Jesus intended to give the Church authority to determine what is Godly and what is not in all areas of life outside of what is clearly central Church teachings (ex.: The Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, the Eucharist, etc.). Things like contraception, female priests, etc. do not seem to me to be as clear as the first category, even though both groups are placed under the heading of “faith and morals.”

To assume that Christ, God the Son, did NOT know what He was doing in giving His Church His full authority to teach in His name, that he did NOT know what issues would arise, and have to be settled, such as over contraception, over the male priesthood, on remarriage, on capital punishment, IVF, cloning, marriage only between the opposite sex, and many other modern problems – is completely incompatible with an all-knowing and all-loving Creator of the Universe and of mankind.

The word Trinity is not in the Sacred Scriptures. His divinity which He proved by His miracles and resurrection, is precisely why we trust His Word and therefore that of His Church on the reality that His Body and Blood become present in the Sacred Host at the consecration at Mass.

BTW, Onan was killed by God because he practiced the contraception of withdrawal (Gen. 38: 9-10).

 

[Convert2011]

jinc1019:

Good to see you seeking truth and understanding. I was a Protestant my whole life until I converted last year. I was in a similar situation where I didn’t really study my faith and was what I call a “complacent Christian”. I went through the motions but didn’t fully commit until a few years ago I started studying Catholicism since I was also married in the Catholic Church and had been going to mass with my wife for about 15 years.

I still have many questions and still do not fully understand all aspects of the faith. You can spend your whole life studying the Church and still not have all your questions answered so at some point you just have to take the leap of faith and commit. I, like you, felt that I needed to have all my questions answered before I converted but the more I studied the more aspects of the faith were unveiled which continually bring up more questions so again it is never ending.

Two major points helped me make the decision to finally commit to the Catholic.

First is quote from St. Augustine, “Therefore do not seek to understand in order to believe, but believe that thou mayest understand.” To my point above you’ll never have all the answers but at some point you just need to commit when you know in your heart that it is the right thing to do.

Second is the list of Popes and the years they served from our current Pope back to Peter and therefore Jesus. When I first saw this I just froze and stared. The Catholic Church is the only Christian Church that can link its lineage directly to Jesus.

I hope I didn’t repeat too much from other posts and hope my insight helps. There were too many for me to read, lol.

 

[Convert2011]

I kept thinking about this thread so I did go back and read most of it particularly JRKH’s responses. Thank you jinc1019 for starting this thread and JRKH for your insight. This really helped me as well. I am new to the forums and this was the first thread I read. This was a blessing.

 

[JRKH]

I kept thinking about this thread so I did go back and read most of it particularly JRKH’s responses. Thank you jinc1019 for starting this thread and JRKH for your insight. This really helped me as well. I am new to the forums and this was the first thread I read. This was a blessing.

You are very welcome.
This is the best site I’ve run across - Glad to have you hear and look forward to reading more of your insights as well.

Peace
James

 

[LiseTravis]

:clapping:

Btw, why does it matter if Jesus said it after resurrection or before?
Excellent point! The Church is only passing on the teachings of Christ.