I still just don't get it

  • Thread starter Thread starter mozart-250
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well obviously I don’t know enough about Orthodoxy to go down this path much more. But from a distance it is very confusing.

But I think I am the exception to the rule to investigate things to the extent that I do.

And your doing a fine job investigating. Although I tend to agree with you about the Eastern and Orthodox compare to the Roman Catholic authority, that from a distance it can look confusing. What you see we all believe the same, but we differ in geography, and customs or rites. such a the Roman clergy take a vow of Chastity for life, the Orthodox clergy are able to enter into Marriage with a man and woman of course, I hope? These are internal differences that dont affect the apostolic teachings of the Church.

What I might mention here although, these two older brothers East and West Catholic church’s have differences within the family, but no one from the outside can seperate their true Catholic belief’s of 2000 years.

boy this thread moves fast
 
Well obviously I don’t know enough about Orthodoxy to go down this path much more. But from a distance it is very confusing.

But I think I am the exception to the rule to investigate things to the extent that I do.

The average Joe Christian at best knows zilch about everything we discussed here. The average Joe Christian will choose a church (at best) based on how much of Jesus they see reflected in that church.

Which brings me to another observation of a disconnect on these same lines. If it were very easy to see Jesus in one organization as opposed to very difficult to see Jesus in the remaining organizations, then it would be kinda easy to figure out that maybe the first organization would be the one you should hook up with.

I can’t say in all honesty say that I see Jesus in your organization any more than I see Jesus in mine. Sorry.
Do you see the delegated authority of Jesus in your church? What about in the Catholic Church?

Do you see the successor to Peter in your church? He is in the Catholic Church?

Is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ in your church? It is in the Catholic Church?

Does the leader of your church have the charism of infallibility? The leader of the Catholic Church does?

Is your church almost 2000 years old, and started by Christ? The Catholic Church is.

Did Christ promise to be with your church until the end of time? He did for the Catholic Church.

Did Christ promise that the gates of hell would never prevail against your church? He did for the Catholic Church.
 
Well there you go. Me too. And here is the difference.

Imagine we are back at 150AD. I am sure that I would have seen Jesus in the one Catholic church of that time. I highly doubt whether I would have seen Jesus in the gnostics and other weirdos of the time.

If we are all the great heretics you all say we are, I just would be just unable to explain Dieterich Bonhoeffer and Corrie ten Boom.
Not really. They were Christians. “Defects” of faith do not leave people completely without grace. The Holy Spirit is notoriously prodigal.

Moreover, one can be a material heretic (holding faulty faith) without being a formal heretic (actively rejecting the faith). These are qualitatively and morally different.

The distinction becomes particularly important in these times, many generations post-reformation, when people are raised in non-Catholic traditions they come to accept in good faith without even being aware that this is problematic on a more global scale.
 
One doesn’t have to be 100% wrong to be a heretic.
But I wouldn’t expect to see Jesus in a heretic.

Once a while back I was reading St. Iranaeus and I was taken back on the attitude that the early church had towards heretics.

There was none of this separated brethren stuff. If you were a heretic, you were not a Christian. Period.

For example, I distinctly recall reading a statement on how the early church literally shunned a heretic.

I couldn’t help but think, that if we were the great heretics you all say we are, how come this relationship that I read in St. Iranaeus wasn’t in play.

Assuming that St. Iranaeus was actually right in all this (and I think he was), you just would not have seen Jesus in the heretics like you see Jesus in in Corrie ten Boom and Dietrich Bonhoffer.

Just another one of my many disconnects here.
 
Not really. They were Christians. “Defects” of faith do not leave people completely without grace. The Holy Spirit is notoriously prodigal.
Really?

When I read Jude and 2 Peter chapter 2 and Titus 3:10-11, the folks these passages talk about aren’t exactly “separated brethren”.
 
But I wouldn’t expect to see Jesus in a heretic.

Once a while back I was reading St. Iranaeus and I was taken back on the attitude that the early church had towards heretics.

There was none of this separated brethren stuff. If you were a heretic, you were not a Christian. Period.

For example, I distinctly recall reading a statement on how the early church literally shunned a heretic.

I couldn’t help but think, that if we were the great heretics you all say we are, how come this relationship that I read in St. Iranaeus wasn’t in play.

Assuming that St. Iranaeus was actually right in all this (and I think he was), you just would not have seen Jesus in the heretics like you see Jesus in in Corrie ten Boom and Dietrich Bonhoffer.

Just another one of my many disconnects here.
Why can’t Christ be in someone who holds one heretical view, they obstinately cling to? Do you seek to limit what He can do? Although, since Christ is the Truth, one would hope that this false belief would eventually go away if the person was more open to Him and said yes to Him.

We may expect, though Christ’s presence might be greater in one who continually said yes to Him and His Word, than one who occasionally said yes, and obstinately held to some false doctrine.
 
But I wouldn’t expect to see Jesus in a heretic.

Once a while back I was reading St. Iranaeus and I was taken back on the attitude that the early church had towards heretics.

There was none of this separated brethren stuff. If you were a heretic, you were not a Christian. Period.
If it’s any comfort to you, you are still a heretic. 🙂

But these days, Christians who espouse the orthodox doctrine of God, as defined in the first four Councils, are definitely considered “Christians.” The heretics of the early Church denied the humanity or divinity of Christ, the Virgin Birth – big stuff like that. Also, Protestantism started out on the Christian/Catholic tree – before the breaks. So you ARE “separated” by virtue of the breaks but by virtue of your valid baptism (if you have it) you are also “brethren” The gnostics et al of the early Church jumped in early and just made up their stuff – much of which prompted those councils in the first place.
For example, I distinctly recall reading a statement on how the early church literally shunned a heretic.

I couldn’t help but think, that if we were the great heretics you all say we are, how come this relationship that I read in St. Iranaeus wasn’t in play.

Assuming that St. Iranaeus was actually right in all this (and I think he was), you just would not have seen Jesus in the heretics like you see Jesus in in Corrie ten Boom and Dietrich Bonhoffer.

Just another one of my many disconnects here.
I hope my view, as stated above has clarified that. Besides – I’m a convert. I cannot deny that the graces I received while I was still in blackest ignorance and obdurate heresy were real. If God did not bestow graces on the heretics like me, we would never come running to Him in His Church.
 
Do you see the delegated authority of Jesus in your church? What about in the Catholic Church?

Do you see the successor to Peter in your church? He is in the Catholic Church?

Is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ in your church? It is in the Catholic Church?

Does the leader of your church have the charism of infallibility? The leader of the Catholic Church does?

Is your church almost 2000 years old, and started by Christ? The Catholic Church is.

Did Christ promise to be with your church until the end of time? He did for the Catholic Church.

Did Christ promise that the gates of hell would never prevail against your church? He did for the Catholic Church.
Your average Joe Christian knows little about the theological differences between Catholics and Protestants.

I would hope that you average Joe Christian that is seeking the presence of God would be able to discern the presence of God in the people of God.

If all of the above is true and if it is “very important” to God, I would expect there to be a significant difference in the presence of God as reflected in the everyday lives of the people in your church that hooking up with y’all would be a literal no brainer.

I don’t see this superiority in your church.

It is all really quite simple to me. Any “ecclesiastical organization” that approaches me from a position of relative superiority must demonstrate their alleged superiority by passing some very basic tests. One of these tests would be that this “ecclesiastical organization” must demonstrate a superior lifestyle as reflected in the every day lives of those that practice that faith…

Otherwise everything we discuss here is academic and really doesn’t matter all that much.
 
But I wouldn’t expect to see Jesus in a heretic.

Once a while back I was reading St. Iranaeus and I was taken back on the attitude that the early church had towards heretics.

There was none of this separated brethren stuff. If you were a heretic, you were not a Christian. Period.

For example, I distinctly recall reading a statement on how the early church literally shunned a heretic.

I couldn’t help but think, that if we were the great heretics you all say we are, how come this relationship that I read in St. Iranaeus wasn’t in play.

Assuming that St. Iranaeus was actually right in all this (and I think he was), you just would not have seen Jesus in the heretics like you see Jesus in in Corrie ten Boom and Dietrich Bonhoffer.

Just another one of my many disconnects here.
Thats because during Iraneus’s time, most people saved their baptism until their death bed or near death. These were heretics because most were not baptised yet, among other reasons for being labeled a heretic. We are in different times when an baptised infant Catholic grows up away from the faith and leaves the church for reasons unbeknowned to him/her, or has been taught incorrect belief’s about the faith is another story that the church has to deal with today, when Iraneus Lived there was only one Catholic church in all the known world. Today you have a valid baptised christian seperated from the Catholic church. The church is moving now to instruct these seperated children from God’s family, that is why you read in the catechism what may appear to the outsider confusing texts about salvation outside the Catholic church, when the wisdom of the Catholic church takes all these fallen away children case by case, and not all of them have the same story from fallen away, or being misinformed about the true body of Jesus Christ on earth.
 
Your average Joe Christian knows little about the theological differences between Catholics and Protestants.

I would hope that you average Joe Christian that is seeking the presence of God would be able to discern the presence of God in the people of God.

If all of the above is true and if it is “very important” to God, I would expect there to be a significant difference in the presence of God as reflected in the everyday lives of the people in your church that hooking up with y’all would be a literal no brainer.

I don’t see that difference. But maybe I am a Spiritual blockhead.
Honestly, I’m beginning to agree with you about the spiritual blockhead thing. I don’t think you really want to see any of this, because you’re committed to manufacturing and throwing up roadblocks to the very decent and proper things loving Catholics have shared with you.

I’ll leave you with one more thing, perhaps God didn’t want to make it overwhelming such that He compelled us to believe in Him. Perhaps He wants us to seek Him, because we desire to love Him back for all the love He has shown and does show us.

If you start off with your own arrogance, and try to apply it to God, what have you really done? Have you sought your Creator as He is, or have you sought to make Him in your own likeness? The right answer to that makes all the difference.
 
Honestly, I’m beginning to agree with you about the spiritual blockhead thing. I don’t think you really want to see any of this, because you’re committed to manufacturing and throwing up roadblocks to the very decent and proper things loving Catholics have shared with you.
Whatever.
 
Whatever.
You seem like a nice guy, but not ready to seriously move ahead yet. I hope you get to that point where serious dialogue regarding the truth is willfully received. At that point, you may begin to move ahead, instead of deflecting the truth in favor of confusion.
 
Whatever.
Mozart,

This is going to be off topic for a second, but love your state! Just got back from vacationing there with my family and it was a blast.

On a more serious note, the problems that you find in the Catholic Church in its members or more likely in specific members does not in any way diminish from the teachings of the Church herself. Even the fact that there are disagreements among the members as to what exactly a particular document might be interpreted to mean should not concern you. You are asking falliable humans to explain infalliable teachings. There are going to be disagreements, but that is what makes the Church so important. If you ever find a Magesterial statement that explicitly states that a moral or dogmatic teaching by a pope or by a council was wrong, then there is a point for contention. Not that the other stuff is unimportant, but for your everyday walk with Christ it should not be a burden to you. This point might all seem a bit simplistic, but I can elaborate if necessary. Peace be with you in your search!
 
Mozart,

This is going to be off topic for a second, but love your state! Just got back from vacationing there with my family and it was a blast.

On a more serious note, the problems that you find in the Catholic Church in its members or more likely in specific members does not in any way diminish from the teachings of the Church herself. Even the fact that there are disagreements among the members as to what exactly a particular document might be interpreted to mean should not concern you. You are asking falliable humans to explain infalliable teachings. There are going to be disagreements, but that is what makes the Church so important. If you ever find a Magesterial statement that explicitly states that a moral or dogmatic teaching by a pope or by a council was wrong, then there is a point for contention. Not that the other stuff is unimportant, but for your everyday walk with Christ it should not be a burden to you. This point might all seem a bit simplistic, but I can elaborate if necessary. Peace be with you in your search!
I would agree that the Church’s official teachings are what we point to. Please note, however, there are documents that provide these infallible teachings so that all Catholics can read, understand and love their Church. Fallible humans can also restate these premises properly. Otherwise, what’s the use of Catholic Apologetics? That a teaching is infallible, doesn’t mean that lay Catholics can’t know it, and understand it, does it? Otherwise, why publish these? Can only Bishops read what is written? It is necessary, though that one be willing and able to receive the teaching, and not distort it. It’s often ignorance and arrogance wherever you find it that often presents a problem. Without humility and a desire to understand, how can one come close to Christ or be a good member of the Church?
 
A true Christian would say that Church and Christ are not separated. However, I have heard from Evangelical Christians (not Lutherans) that you don’t need the Church and all you need is Jesus. How do you explain that?
If the church and Christ are not somehow separated then Christ would be in partnership with evil.
 
I would agree that the Church’s official teachings are what we point to. Please note, however, there are documents that provide these infallible teachings so that all Catholics can read, understand and love their Church. Fallible humans can also restate these premises properly. Otherwise, what’s the use of Catholic Apologetics? That a teaching is infallible, doesn’t mean that lay Catholics can’t know it, and understand it, does it? Otherwise, why publish these? Can only Bishops read what is written? It is necessary, though that one be willing and able to receive the teaching, and not distort it. It’s often ignorance and arrogance wherever you find it that often presents a problem. Without humility and a desire to understand, how can one come close to Christ or be a good member of the Church?
I apologize if it seems that I was stating that one cannot know what the infalliable teachings are just because we are falliable creatures. I am studying theology myself and so I at least hope to have some grasp on what the meaning of various ex cathedra documents. However, what I was trying to state was that just because some people may disagree about the meaning, does not mean you should discount the truth being proclaimed. In other words, do not throw the baby out with a little dirty bathwater.
This is where faith comes into play(and humility as you most appropriately put it above) and understanding our reliance upon the Church which is Christ prolongated on earth.
 
Your average Joe Christian knows little about the theological differences between Catholics and Protestants.

I would hope that you average Joe Christian that is seeking the presence of God would be able to discern the presence of God in the people of God.

If all of the above is true and if it is “very important” to God, I would expect there to be a significant difference in the presence of God as reflected in the everyday lives of the people in your church that hooking up with y’all would be a literal no brainer.

I don’t see this superiority in your church.

It is all really quite simple to me. Any “ecclesiastical organization” that approaches me from a position of relative superiority must demonstrate their alleged superiority by passing some very basic tests. One of these tests would be that this “ecclesiastical organization” must demonstrate a superior lifestyle as reflected in the every day lives of those that practice that faith…

Otherwise everything we discuss here is academic and really doesn’t matter all that much.
Once average Joe Christian starts to ask questions, like: Did Jesus have two natures or one? Is the Holy Spirit a divine Person? How does Baptism work? then he’s kicked himself up a notch and the answers become very important.

But if lifestyle is now your criterion of the true Church, y’all need to go become a Mormon. They got us all beat, hands down.
 
I apologize if it seems that I was stating that one cannot know what the infalliable teachings are just because we are falliable creatures. I am studying theology myself and so I at least hope to have some grasp on what the meaning of various ex cathedra documents. However, what I was trying to state was that just because some people may disagree about the meaning, does not mean you should discount the truth being proclaimed. In other words, do not throw the baby out with a little dirty bathwater.
This is where faith comes into play(and humility as you most appropriately put it above) and understanding our reliance upon the Church which is Christ prolongated on earth.
As you’ll find out, there can be different Theologies within the Catholic faith. It’s the doctrine and dogma that we need to all be harmonious on. I saw on your profile that you were a grad student in Catholic Univ. Please be careful, as theology departments are sometimes known for sharks in there. You really need to become able to stand on your feet in there, making sure you remain and become even more Catholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top