If you are a “Protestant” or a Non-Catholic Christian, would you please share with us Catholics a summary of what it is that you actually believe?

[emeraldcoast]

Hello, emeraldcoast and welcome to CAF.

I watched the video and I found it interesting. It was pretty much what I thought it was…a lot of similarities’ to Catholic Confession”. I didn’t know though, that the Episcopal “Confession” was called, “Reconciliation and the Penitent”, I hope I got that right. The Catholic Church calls “Confession”, “Penance and Reconciliation”.

With your background, you are going to make a Great Roman Catholic.

Peace

Oh Jimmy, you made me giggle! I enjoy my Episcopalian Church and am grateful for it.

1 Corinthians 12:4-7

4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all

God Bless!

 

[ponyman]

It is rather easy to say what I believe: I believe in Jesus as the second member of the Trinity - Father, Son and Holy Spirit; I blieve that because of God’s unending love and the submission of the Blessed Mother in becoming his worthy vessel that Jesus was born of a virgin, was raised by St. Joseph, became the only worthy sacrifice to the Father and was crucified, died, was buried and rose again in fullfilment of the Scriputures and that he now sits at the right hand of God the father. He returns to us in the Eurcharist to share his love. Simple ain’t it? But it’s true. Everyone wants to make it all so difficult but even as scripture said it is so simple that a child can understand it.
While everyone is free to experience their own relationship with God, I have always felt it more profoundly within the Catholic Church in the Mass; not so much concerned with the political structure, but I do believe that the Church does not err in matters of faith and doctrine, although some times there seems to be certain inconsistencies with my thinking about various subjects, but then Holy Mother Church has had centuries to reason out many things that my finite mind can not grasp in the small amount of time that I have been on this earth,
When it comes to my own perceptions regarding God I ceased to be such a meglomaniac many years ago and I am still learning each day that some of the chuch fathers were all too accurate in their perceptions. After all, I have great problems doing algebra so how can I perceive of a God who can simply will things into existence. No, it is like St. Anselm said: God is that of which nothing greater can be thought! When it comes to me, I am so limited by my finite mind that I can not possibly understand in even a remote sense the infinite God. God is not only that of which nothing greater can be thought, I can’t even begin to either explain Him or to comprehend Him. Even the disciples were with Him on a daily basis and did not understand Him. As it has been said, He became known to us in the breaking of the bread.
I simply believe in Him.

 

[LutheranDK]

What do you believe?

If you are a “Protestant” or a Non-Catholic Christian, would you please share with us Catholics a summary of what it is that you actually believe?

I will be honest with you, as a Roman Catholic, I am confuse by so many different Christian denominations and it is difficult, if not impossible for me and some other Catholics here at CAF to keep up and the responds from some of our non-Catholic Christians friends here, because we don’t know what it is that you actually believe.

There are many of you out there, who seen to know with certainty what it is, that the Catholic Church “got wrong”. Therefore, it should be easy for them to tell us what it is that they believe their religion ‘got right”,
.
I have a general sense of what “Protestant” and what some non-Catholic Christians here believe, so when I post, I will often start with something like, “Some “Protestants” believe that…”

Then immediately, I will get a response back from a member here at CAF, who will say, I am a “Protestant” and I do not believe that. Well, want do I do now?

Moreover, what is a non-Denomination Christian religion?

Are there any wild or interesting beliefs out there? For instance, is the world going to end on 2012 or are aliens are real? Are there any Prophets out there who talk with God? Does anybody out there foresee the future? Are ghosts real? Can you speak to dead people? Have you ever witnessed or performed a miracle?

Does your church teach you about Catholicism? What have you heard?

What does your non-Catholic Christian Church teach you about Catholicism? Be honest and don’t pull and punches, we Catholics can it.

Please share with us Catholics a summary of what it is that you actually believe?

A few short points:

1: I believe that salvation is ONLY achieved through Jesus, and that true faith in Him is the ONLY requirement to be saved. Good deeds are just that - good, and worthy of striving towards for the sake of the love our Lord has shown us; but as a mean of salvation they are useless, and believing that good deeds save is not Christianity, it is “Phariseeism”.

2: I believe in ONE holy catholic church - but not defined as the Roman church. The one church is the universal (the actual meaning of the word katholikos) and invisible bond of all believers, from all denominations, tribes, tongues, etc.

I could go into WAY more detail on any number of topics including baptism, Holy Communion, etc, but that woud take more time than I have right now.

 

[Jimmy_B]

What do you Believe?

If you are a “Protestant” or a Non-Catholic Christian, would you please share with us Catholics a summary of what it is that you actually believe?

I will be honest with you, as a Roman Catholic, I am confuse by so many different Christian denominations and it is difficult, if not impossible for me and some other Catholics here at CAF to keep up and the responds from some of our non-Catholic Christians friends here, because we don’t know what it is that you actually believe.

There are many of you out there, who seen to know with certainty what it is, that the Catholic Church “got wrong”. Therefore, it should be easy for them to tell us what it is that they believe their religion ‘got right”,

I have a general sense of what “Protestant” and what some non-Catholic Christians here believe, so when I post, I will often start with something like, “Some “Protestants” believe that…”

Then immediately, I will get a response back from a member here at CAF, who will say, I am a “Protestant” and I do not believe that. Well, want do I do now?

Moreover, what is a non-Denomination Christian religion?

Are there any wild or interesting beliefs out there? For instance, is the world going to end on 2012 or are aliens are real? Are there any Prophets out there who talk with God? Does anybody out there foresee the future? Are ghosts real? Can you speak to dead people? Have you ever witnessed or performed a miracle?

Does your church teach you about Catholicism? What have you heard?

What does your non-Catholic Christian Church teach you about Catholicism? Be honest and don’t pull and punches, we Catholics can it.

Please share with us Catholics a summary of what it is that you actually believe?

Jimmy B

Thank you, to all of you who have so far, shared their beliefs here. I have learned some things that I hadn’t previously know.

Peace

 

[ponyman]

Jimmy:

Don’t be confused. As my old parish priest, God rest his soul, used to say: “Anything that confuses you is not of God but is of the devil.” As my dear wife would say, look for a “Thus sayeth the Lord” when you are trying to determine if something is scriptural and holy. Look to scripture and you will not be misled.

There is a lot which is right with the Church; the first and foremost is the Lord - that is the starting point. The next thing is that something which is not valid can not possibly last for two thousand years and continue to find its meaning in the very person who founded it -ie God.

Sure, there are some things which we have a hard time reconciling within the political structure of the Church but the teachings of the Church are not in error; they are sound. We have a basic tendency to want to solve all of the theological problems within both our finite minds and within our finite time on this earth but the Church has been trying to deal with these issues for two thousand years and each time it gets things right it is when the Church, and its care-takers, rely upon the infallible Word of God. Whatever else really does not matter since God is very good at expressing Himself.

What I believe in is this: God -Father, Son and Holy Spirit; I believe in the infallibility of the Scriptures; I believe in the sanctity of the Mass and that by some strange miracle that Jesus returns to us in the Eurcharist to allow us to participate in His salvific process. I believe that the Holy Catholic Church - both Roman and Eastern Rites, were and are the original earthly manifestations of the Body of Christ which continues to this day in immitation of the Risen Christ and through which He continues His works.

I do not believe that there are prophets yet among us. Revealation ended with the death of the last Appostle. Even Holy Scripture warns us against sooth-sayers and false prophets. If you want prophecy, look to the Word of God - it’s all in there and we don’t need so-called spirit talkers and sooth-sayers.

Now that we have said that, this does not prevent either the Lord or the Blessed Mother or one of the Saints from manifesting themselves to us, if they choose to do so to help us have faith, but, please remember, if anything confuses you in your search to do God’s will it is not from the Lord and you should be wary, especially of people who think that they are some how prophets. So called modern day prophets are about as accurate as horoscopes that you read in the newspapers where someone sat around making up tripe.

Study the Scriptures and you will not be mislead.

Be gentle with yourself.
Ponyman

 

[Jimmy_B]

Jimmy:

Don’t be confused. As my old parish priest, God rest his soul, used to say: “Anything that confuses you is not of God but is of the devil.” As my dear wife would say, look for a “Thus sayeth the Lord” when you are trying to determine if something is scriptural and holy. Look to scripture and you will not be misled.

There is a lot which is right with the Church; the first and foremost is the Lord - that is the starting point. The next thing is that something which is not valid can not possibly last for two thousand years and continue to find its meaning in the very person who founded it -ie God.

Sure, there are some things which we have a hard time reconciling within the political structure of the Church but the teachings of the Church are not in error; they are sound. We have a basic tendency to want to solve all of the theological problems within both our finite minds and within our finite time on this earth but the Church has been trying to deal with these issues for two thousand years and each time it gets things right it is when the Church, and its care-takers, rely upon the infallible Word of God. Whatever else really does not matter since God is very good at expressing Himself.

What I believe in is this: God -Father, Son and Holy Spirit; I believe in the infallibility of the Scriptures; I believe in the sanctity of the Mass and that by some strange miracle that Jesus returns to us in the Eurcharist to allow us to participate in His salvific process. I believe that the Holy Catholic Church - both Roman and Eastern Rites, were and are the original earthly manifestations of the Body of Christ which continues to this day in immitation of the Risen Christ and through which He continues His works.

I do not believe that there are prophets yet among us. Revealation ended with the death of the last Appostle. Even Holy Scripture warns us against sooth-sayers and false prophets. If you want prophecy, look to the Word of God - it’s all in there and we don’t need so-called spirit talkers and sooth-sayers.

Now that we have said that, this does not prevent either the Lord or the Blessed Mother or one of the Saints from manifesting themselves to us, if they choose to do so to help us have faith, but, please remember, if anything confuses you in your search to do God’s will it is not from the Lord and you should be wary, especially of people who think that they are some how prophets. So called modern day prophets are about as accurate as horoscopes that you read in the newspapers where someone sat around making up tripe.

Study the Scriptures and you will not be mislead.

Be gentle with yourself.
Ponyman

Hello ponyman,

I agree with you, so why did you address this to me saying, “Don’t be confused”, I’m not confused. I completely and fully surrender to Christ and His Roman Catholic Church and the Pope, and that is where my beliefs can be found.

I can be mistaken at times, because I am not infallible… but then I refer back to Catholicism, where my Pope and the Magisterium is infallible; for the correct answer(s). The purpose of this thread is to see what we have in common or don’t have in common. I did this because I am constantly being accused here, of over generalizing about our “Protestants” friends. I did not start this thread because I am confused, I started this thread, so that I could better understand others here a CAF.

I will never be anything other than a Roman Catholic.

I hope this clears things up…

Credo…Viva Cristo Rey!

Peace

 

[ponyman]

Hi Jimmy:

I did not mean to intimate that you were confused, only that one should not allow anything to sow confusion during one’s journey in unity with Christ. The differences which exist in the various dogmas of the varient denominations can result in a confusion of the real issue, and that is the primary reason for all of our beliefs, the Lord Jesus and the Trinity. We can loose sight of the real issue here which is that the sole reason for the Christian religion in its various forms is singularly the love and sacrifice of Christ. Everything else is mere rhetoric.

We, as Catholics, are sometimes so dogmatic that we think that everyone else is totally wrong. While I choose to believe that Holy Mother Church is generally the right path for me, I was also raised in both a Catholic tradition and a Protestant tradition simultaneously. My family is diverse in its denominations. I attended services at most all of the different faiths in our community to include Jewish Synogogue. I have friends that are Buddist and Muslim. My wife belongs to the Church of Christ. While there are differences in our methodololgy, and while I feel that the Catholic Church is predominently correct as it was the original church of Christ, each Christian faith shares a distinct commonality: we all believe in Christ as both the founder of our faith and the reason for it. While Prostestants do not see the Eucharist in the same way as we Catholics, they still revere and celebrate the Lord’s Supper as an important part of their religious experience, while we as Catholics believe that Christ becomes manifest through transubstantiation in the Eucharist. But who are we to say that Christ may not decide to manifest himself to our Protestant breathern in a similar miraculous way that is just as valid? With God all things are possible. I feel that we emphasize too many differences between the various faiths rather than emphasizing the main similarity: our common belief in Christ. After all, our Lord started out as a Jew, right?

It appears that satan has done an excellent job in emphasizing our differences between the various denominations and we tend to buy into the sham. The Catholic Church expresses a need for Ecuminism and yet we tend to continue to stay both aloof and divisive when it comes time to find commonality between the denominations of the Christian faith; this sows confusion. Yes, there are issues which we as Catholics can not negotiate. There are certain aspects of our Catholic beliefs that can not be negotiated because these things make us truly Catholic. But we have to move beyound the confusion and find that element of our combined faith which should draw us together; that is Christ.

We can not afford to be confused in our beliefs and we can not allow others to confuse us with issues which detract from Christ. But we can approach our differences through our combined relationship to Christ. Christ is the center piece at the banquet table. That is why I can pray with either a Catholic, or a Baptist, Methodist, etc, in the spirit of Christ, and all without sacrificing any aspect of my Catholic faith. Sometimes we forget that the word Catholic only means “Universal.” Our Church is the “Universal” Church of Christ. We are not simply labeled as Catholics, but Catholic Christians.

A priest friend of mine from my old seminary days wrote to me recently that he was going through a rather bad time as his Catholic diocese was attempting to combine several parishes into one. There was a lot disagreement among these Catholics. Even these Catholics could not agree on very basic issues regarding something which should have been so simple: the combining of several families of Christ into one family. Everyone wanted to confuse the issues. I finally wrote back to him and suggested that he put a simple question to his flock: What would Jesus do in this situation? Everyone was loosing sight of the goal. They needed to come together as a family in Christ. We all sometimes make the mistake of allowing the little differences to confuse us from the real issue of doing what Christ would have us do in coming together to worship and adore Him as a family of God’s people.

Once again, I did not mean to offend you by implying that you were confused. All I am saying is that we, as Christians, can not allow all of the rhetoric and attendant issues to confuse us in what it is that we believe; that is that Christ is our sole reason for belief. Holy Scriptures emphasize: Believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. He is sufficient.

I also must say this. No matter which Church you belong to that church is not going to save you; only Christ can do that and he already has. We can not allow ourselves to be distracted or obscured in following the light of Christ, not even by those who are well meaning even within our own Church. Any church is little more than an imperfect reflection of the Heavenly Church wherein Christ rules.

I encourage you in both your faith and your journey. It is through mutual encouragement in our combined journey to Christ that we grow. The confusion arises only when we loose sight of the only real reason for both our dialogue and our existence; and that is Christ.

Ponyman

 

[Jimmy_B]

Hello ponyman

I appreciate your comments and your candor but I find your comments here sum-what confusing, maybe you can help me understand. Are you a Roman Catholic or not? Are you an observant Catholic or not? Do you still, now attend other non-Catholic Churches? You mentioned that your wife is non-Catholic and that she “belongs to the Church of Christ”. I am not asking and I do not want to know what your marriage situation is, because it is none of my business. However, I do know that in order to receive Communion (the Eucharist), a Catholic’s marriage must be recognize by the Catholic Church, which usually means that a Catholic priest must marry them in a Catholic Church.

I ask these questions, because your comments here come across a being authoritative, coming from a “Catholic”, yet your beliefs seem to be a mixture of many different beliefs, including non-Catholic beliefs.

Moreover, what does this even mean (below) “combining of several families of Christ”?

A priest friend of mine from my old seminary days wrote to me recently that he was going through a rather bad time as his Catholic diocese was attempting to combine several parishes into one. There was a lot disagreement among these Catholics. Even these Catholics could not agree on very basic issues regarding something which should have been so simple: the combining of several families of Christ into one family.

And what does this mean –

That is why I can pray with either a Catholic, or a Baptist, Methodist, etc, in the spirit of Christ, and all without sacrificing any aspect of my Catholic faith. Sometimes we forget that the word Catholic only means “Universal.” Our Church is the “Universal” Church of Christ. We are not simply labeled as Catholics, but Catholic Christians.

Peace

 

[ponyman]

Hi Jimmy:

Yes, I am a Roman Catholic - old school at that. I was once even a seminarian for a diocese and went to one of the most conservative seminaries in the United States. I still bemoan the loss of the Latin Mass and I am really about as conservative as Attilla the Hun. But I believe that Christ is everywhere and is to be found frequenting all Christian faiths, but I am not so arrogant to think that we are the only ones that Christ communes with.

My wife is very happy and dedicated to her denomination. It would greatly please me if she converted, but that is not necessary as long as she is committed to God. Sometimes we attend her church and she has no problems with attending mine. She has some real problems with the Catholic faith because many of our Rites and customs she does not accept as Scriptually valid. An example would be infant baptism and use of the word Father to our priests. She demands a" Thus sayeth the Lord" for everything and for her it clearly states in Scripture that we are to call no man father except our father in Heaven.
I think that a marriage is sanctified by God Himself. Our marriage was clearly blessed by God from the beginning. He brought us together.
I have had a mixture of exposure and the ability to ferret out the reality of life. Nothing is ever completely perfect in this world. We must seek to find a commonality when trying to decern God’s will and build a Christian marriage. My wife could not be more Christian.
While I was an under-graduate I studied at Methodist Universities and even received a minor in Methodist based Religion. Later I completed some of my graduate studies at a Christian Church affiliated universty. I even attended a State university At seminary it was, of course, a conservative catholic one.
I think that it is best to allow the couples in a mixed religeous marriage to be faithful to their own chosen denomination. This is contrary to some thinking. I really do not think Christ demands my wife leave her denomination as long as she is loyal to her faith. II have never met a more Christian person than my wife and I doubt that I ever will. I certainly believe the words of Scripture, that there is neither Jew nor Greek, etc (Gal.), apply here and in many cases. We are all one in Christ, right? God created man in His own image, male and female He created them (Gen).
Even the Church questions our traditions from time to time. Take the case of priestly celebacy, I can remember when I was in seminary that it was greatly supposed that Pope John Paul I was going to relax the requirement for diocessian priests to marry; many of us were excited about the prospect since the Eastern Rite had always allowed priests to marry. After all, celebacy was instituted some five hundred years after Christ and was mainly done for economic reasons and was clearly not supported by the gospel (Remember: It is better for you to marry than to burn…). But then John Paul I died unexpectedly and the custom was continued.
I am sure of my own convictions in matters of faith but I do have many questions as to some of our customs and practices. As followers of Christ have an obligation to question things and not follow blindly. I am not that radical because I lived through the days of the statue breakers, Liberation Theology, but I do believe the faith of all of our Christian breathern, including my wife, have a valid belief structure and faith. Christ does not discriminate in his love. If my wife wants to have our marriage blessed by a priest then I know a bunch of them who would be happy to do the job and I would love it; but as long as she is happy in her faith I do not have the right to demand it.
What I was talking about with my friend the priest and his parish problems is that it seems so silly to me that so many people, although they come from separate parishes, can be so silly in not coming together as a family of God. It seems that they are making my friend’s life miserable by all of their petty in-fighting over trivial issues when the situation, and the arch diocese, mandates they come together. It makes me think that Christ would probably say to them as he did to the storm: “Be still.” It seems that they are missing the whole point.
Plese remember, we actually owe a lot to Father Luther because he had courage when he nailed his treatises to the door of the church. From time to time the church needs to re-think some of its positions and practices, and I am not talking about Ex-Cathedra and faith and morals. I love the traditions of our Church, and the fact that Christ has given us so many gifts, particularly in the Eucharist. I love our traditions regarding the Holy Mother, something which my wife totally does not understand. But she clearly loves the Lord and I love her.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Take the case of priestly celebacy, I can remember when I was in seminary that it was greatly supposed that Pope John Paul I was going to relax the requirement for diocessian priests to marry; many of us were excited about the prospect since the Eastern Rite had always allowed priests to marry. After all, celebacy was instituted some five hundred years after Christ and was mainly done for economic reasons and was clearly not supported by the gospel (Remember: It is better for you to marry than to burn…).

Let’s remember that celibacy is a Church practice and NOT a church doctrine. And as far as it not beinng supported by the Gospel, I refer you to Matt. 19:11-12 where Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church’s practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.

 

[nsper7]

As a soon-to-be Confirmed Episcopalian, I would say the following:

Much of my theology can be summed up in the Nicene Creed (with ‘Catholic’ in its literal translation as ‘Universal’…there is one Universal Church), the XXXIX Article of Religion and the Anglican Catechism. I do not, at this time, take a stand on Arminianism vs. Calvinism. I believe in free grace theology (check out www.faithalone.org for articles detailing and defending FGS and check out faithalone.org/Sure/Default.htm for how an FGS person believes you become Saved) and sacramental theology (I believe that the Sacraments [two major, five minor] convey edifying/sanctifying grace, but not saving grace, and act as channels for God’s grace).

 

[emeraldcoast]

As a soon-to-be Confirmed Episcopalian, I would say the following:

Much of my theology can be summed up in the Nicene Creed (with ‘Catholic’ in its literal translation as ‘Universal’…there is one Universal Church), the XXXIX Article of Religion and the Anglican Catechism. I do not, at this time, take a stand on Arminianism vs. Calvinism. I believe in free grace theology (check out www.faithalone.org for articles detailing and defending FGS and check out faithalone.org/Sure/Default.htm for how an FGS person believes you become Saved) and sacramental theology (I believe that the Sacraments [two major, five minor] convey edifying/sanctifying grace, but not saving grace, and act as channels for God’s grace).

Congrats on your upcoming Confirmation in the Episcopal Church! The Episcopal Church family has been a great blessing to my family and I pray that it will be for you as well.

God Bless!

 

[emeraldcoast]

Hi Jimmy:

Yes, I am a Roman Catholic - old school at that. I was once even a seminarian for a diocese and went to one of the most conservative seminaries in the United States. I still bemoan the loss of the Latin Mass and I am really about as conservative as Attilla the Hun. But I believe that Christ is everywhere and is to be found frequenting all Christian faiths, but I am not so arrogant to think that we are the only ones that Christ communes with.

My wife is very happy and dedicated to her denomination. It would greatly please me if she converted, but that is not necessary as long as she is committed to God. Sometimes we attend her church and she has no problems with attending mine. She has some real problems with the Catholic faith because many of our Rites and customs she does not accept as Scriptually valid. An example would be infant baptism and use of the word Father to our priests. She demands a" Thus sayeth the Lord" for everything and for her it clearly states in Scripture that we are to call no man father except our father in Heaven.
I think that a marriage is sanctified by God Himself. Our marriage was clearly blessed by God from the beginning. He brought us together.
I have had a mixture of exposure and the ability to ferret out the reality of life. Nothing is ever completely perfect in this world. We must seek to find a commonality when trying to decern God’s will and build a Christian marriage. My wife could not be more Christian.
While I was an under-graduate I studied at Methodist Universities and even received a minor in Methodist based Religion. Later I completed some of my graduate studies at a Christian Church affiliated universty. I even attended a State university At seminary it was, of course, a conservative catholic one.
I think that it is best to allow the couples in a mixed religeous marriage to be faithful to their own chosen denomination. This is contrary to some thinking. I really do not think Christ demands my wife leave her denomination as long as she is loyal to her faith. II have never met a more Christian person than my wife and I doubt that I ever will. I certainly believe the words of Scripture, that there is neither Jew nor Greek, etc (Gal.), apply here and in many cases. We are all one in Christ, right? God created man in His own image, male and female He created them (Gen).
Even the Church questions our traditions from time to time. Take the case of priestly celebacy, I can remember when I was in seminary that it was greatly supposed that Pope John Paul I was going to relax the requirement for diocessian priests to marry; many of us were excited about the prospect since the Eastern Rite had always allowed priests to marry. After all, celebacy was instituted some five hundred years after Christ and was mainly done for economic reasons and was clearly not supported by the gospel (Remember: It is better for you to marry than to burn…). But then John Paul I died unexpectedly and the custom was continued.
I am sure of my own convictions in matters of faith but I do have many questions as to some of our customs and practices. As followers of Christ have an obligation to question things and not follow blindly. I am not that radical because I lived through the days of the statue breakers, Liberation Theology, but I do believe the faith of all of our Christian breathern, including my wife, have a valid belief structure and faith. Christ does not discriminate in his love. If my wife wants to have our marriage blessed by a priest then I know a bunch of them who would be happy to do the job and I would love it; but as long as she is happy in her faith I do not have the right to demand it.
What I was talking about with my friend the priest and his parish problems is that it seems so silly to me that so many people, although they come from separate parishes, can be so silly in not coming together as a family of God. It seems that they are making my friend’s life miserable by all of their petty in-fighting over trivial issues when the situation, and the arch diocese, mandates they come together. It makes me think that Christ would probably say to them as he did to the storm: “Be still.” It seems that they are missing the whole point.
Plese remember, we actually owe a lot to Father Luther because he had courage when he nailed his treatises to the door of the church. From time to time the church needs to re-think some of its positions and practices, and I am not talking about Ex-Cathedra and faith and morals. I love the traditions of our Church, and the fact that Christ has given us so many gifts, particularly in the Eucharist. I love our traditions regarding the Holy Mother, something which my wife totally does not understand. But she clearly loves the Lord and I love her.

Ponyman,

Thank you for the great post. Quick question for you-- on married matters like birth control how were you able with your wife to work that out since both churches hold different points of views on the matter? Thank you!

God Bless!

 

[Jimmy_B]

Let’s remember that celibacy is a Church practice and NOT a church doctrine. And as far as it not beinng supported by the Gospel, I refer you to Matt. 19:11-12 where Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church’s practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.

Good post

 

[ponyman]

Hi Emeralcoast:
Thank you for your kind words. Birth control, or the practice of it, has never been an issue with my wife and myself. My wife is a conservative Christian of the Church of Christ faith and is therefore very Pro-Life. In fact, she has been extremely active over the years as a Pro-Life advocate in both her personal life and as a journalist and owner of a newspaper. We both see the sanctity of life as created by God and would never have been involved in anything which would have prevented that life. The Church of Christ holds the same position as the RC Church on the issue of Pro-Life; many Protestant Churches also are very conservative on this issue, as well as birth control, but perhaps they use a little different language to describe their stance.

SK: If it is only a practice maybe the Church should allow priests to marry if they want. It might have solved a lot of problems in the past.

NSPER7:
If I may ask, as a mitzvah for me, when do you believe that the Holy Scriptures came into being? With your remarkable background as coming from the Jewish faith originally, you have studied the Torah. Would you agree that the Word of God has been around for thousands of years in the written form?

My family has some Jewish blood in it too. Quess that makes us both part of the Chosen People of God! We lost over 120 of our entended family in the Holocaust that I have found so far.

Shma Israel, Adonai allohainu …
shalom,
Ponyman

 

[Sir_Knight]

SK: If it is only a practice maybe the Church should allow priests to marry if they want. It might have solved a lot of problems in the past.

In Matt. 22:30 Jesus explains that in heaven there are no marriages. To bring about Jesus’ kingdom on earth, priests live the heavenly consecration to God by not taking a wife in marriage. This way, priests are able to focus exclusively on the spiritual family, and not have any additional pressures of the biological family (which is for the vocation of marriage). This also makes it easier for priests to be transferred to different parishes where they are most needed without having to worry about the impact of their transfer on wife and children.

 

[ponyman]

SK

Please give me a real scriptural passage that authorizes celebacy. Everytime you give me a passage of scripture and I look it up it really gives no authority for whatever you are talking about, but then why should it? According to you the Church made it all up in the 4th century!

Look, we all know the real reason behind celebacy was the economic one; the church hates to pay people! But it rarely seemed to apply to the popes. Remember when the Borgia popes processed down the aisle they had so many of their children following them that there was hardly room in the church. Rank has always had its privileges I suppose.

Plus, don’t we all know at least part of the reason behind the celebacy rule. Think about it a moment. This is not to say that we don’t have some very dedicated and christian people as priests; I do not wish to disparage any of them for they do a marvellous job.

There may not be marriage in Heaven and I for one am saddened by this prospect. There may simply not be a need, and Christ knew this. Since He is the AUTHORITY I accept everything He said about it. I am confident that my wife will still be there right beside of me throughout all eternity.

As for the celebacy rule, I can take it or leave it since it is a man-made device created for economic reasons and to control the priests. Priests might even find it helpful to have wives and they certainly would have a more than theoretical approach to marriage counselling. Even in the Scriptures is says “…that it is better for you to marry than to burn…”

The vow of celebacy may be a lot like the vow of poverty. Have you ever spent any time in a religious order, particularly one dedicated to poverty? Man, I have never eaten so well in my life what with all the steaks and stuff. Have you ever known a priest that had a “problem” with celebacy? I have - a few in fact. It is not a natural state of affairs for man to be alone. It certainly is not really “healthy” for a bunch of men to live together all the time.

Have you read the documents from Vatican II yet? Oh well, maybe the church just made those up like they did the Bible, right? I guess that we can either take them or leave them, right? Oh, but there is one problem - they came from the magisterium and the Pope - His Holiness (and I mean that sincerely ) Pope John XXIII. Man, he was a class act after having to follow in the ermine drapped image and foot-steps of Pious XII who signed a Concordance with Adolf Hitler. That one really liked his ermine! Pope John was not only a man of faith but a man who both walked the walk and talked the talked, and he loved Christ. That is why he convened Vatican II and I, for one, accept the mandates of Vatican II which he convened and I accept the documents with the full authority which the Church meant for them to have, particularly the reverence for Holy Scripture that we are supposed to have. Whatta you think? They are infallible, right, because when the Pope speaks, he is infallible. Or are you willing to accept only those doctrines which you choose? That is what it sounds like to me.

Look, you either accept the whole ball of wax or none of it. That’s the bottom line. If you accept me and the others who have belonged to the masonic order to accept those teachings, then it only logically follows that you must accept ALL of the teachings of the Church, including what it says about God, the Holy Spirit and the Holy Scriptures. You can have it both ways. No LIE here bub, only the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Can you take it?

 

[JackQ]

I don’t think there is anything else I could do in this world except be ordained - 10+ years of higher education and 21 years in the parish. And I don’t think there is room for me and my wife and child in the Catholic Church.

Methodists, as well an Anglicans, have always adhered to the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds. That’s not just what I believe.

Take another look at that. Clergymen who come from other Christian denominations often become priests and are allowed to remain married.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Please give me a real scriptural passage that authorizes celebacy.

I already have – Matt. 19:11-12 … where Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. This is echoed by Paul in 1 Cor. 7:7 who also acknowledges that celibacy is a gift from God and wishes that all were celibate like he is. And let’s not forget 1 Cor. 7:32-33 & 38 where Paul recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church so that they are able to focus entirely upon God and building up His kingdom. He “who refrains from marriage will do better.”

Everytime you give me a passage of scripture and I look it up it really gives no authority for whatever you are talking about,

You don’t consider the infallible Word of God sufficient authority?

but then why should it? According to you the Church made it all up in the 4th century!

Don’t put words in my mouth in an attempt to build a strawman arguement. I never said that the church made anything up. I said that the church, as guided by the Holy Spirit, determined the official canon of the bible in the late fourth century. Prior to that, there was no bible. Just a lot of scripture – some of it sacred and some of it not.

Look, we all know the real reason behind celebacy was the economic one; the church hates to pay people!

And where does the church get it’s money from? From the people.

But it rarely seemed to apply to the popes. Remember when the Borgia popes processed down the aisle they had so many of their children following them that there was hardly room in the church. Rank has always had its privileges I suppose.

Didn’t Judas also complain when expensive oil was used to perfume Jesus’s feet?

Plus, don’t we all know at least part of the reason behind the celebacy rule. Think about it a moment. This is not to say that we don’t have some very dedicated and christian people as priests; I do not wish to disparage any of them for they do a marvellous job.

There may not be marriage in Heaven and I for one am saddened by this prospect. There may simply not be a need, and Christ knew this. Since He is the AUTHORITY I accept everything He said about it. I am confident that my wife will still be there right beside of me throughout all eternity.

As for the celebacy rule, I can take it or leave it since it is a man-made device created for economic reasons and to control the priests. Priests might even find it helpful to have wives and they certainly would have a more than theoretical approach to marriage counselling. Even in the Scriptures is says “…that it is better for you to marry than to burn…”

Scripture also says that He “who refrains from marriage will do better.” (1 Cor. 7:32-33 & 38)

The vow of celebacy may be a lot like the vow of poverty. Have you ever spent any time in a religious order, particularly one dedicated to poverty? Man, I have never eaten so well in my life what with all the steaks and stuff. Have you ever known a priest that had a “problem” with celebacy? I have - a few in fact. It is not a natural state of affairs for man to be alone. It certainly is not really “healthy” for a bunch of men to live together all the time.

You mean the way that Jesus lived together with tweleve men for three years?

Have you read the documents from Vatican II yet?

And do they say something against celebacy? If so, please quote them here. If not, why bring them up?

Oh well, maybe the church just made those up like they did the Bible, right?

You either have a problem understanding what you read or you are trying to win an arguement through dishonest means. Which is it?

I guess that we can either take them or leave them, right? Oh, but there is one problem - they came from the magisterium and the Pope - His Holiness (and I mean that sincerely ) Pope John XXIII. Man, he was a class act after having to follow in the ermine drapped image and foot-steps of Pious XII who signed a Concordance with Adolf Hitler. That one really liked his ermine! Pope John was not only a man of faith but a man who both walked the walk and talked the talked, and he loved Christ. That is why he convened Vatican II and I, for one, accept the mandates of Vatican II which he convened and I accept the documents with the full authority which the Church meant for them to have, particularly the reverence for Holy Scripture that we are supposed to have. Whatta you think? They are infallible, right, because when the Pope speaks, he is infallible. Or are you willing to accept only those doctrines which you choose? That is what it sounds like to me.

Exactly what is your point? Scripture is infallible and so are the official teachings of the church.

Look, you either accept the whole ball of wax or none of it. That’s the bottom line. If you accept me and the others who have belonged to the masonic order to accept those teachings, then it only logically follows that you must accept ALL of the teachings of the Church, including what it says about God, the Holy Spirit and the Holy Scriptures. You can have it both ways. No LIE here bub, only the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Can you take it?

That is far from the truth. The church has clearly declared that those who belong to a masonic order, do so under penality of a grave sin and are barred from the sacraments – that is official church teaching … reference here.

 

[ponyman]

SK

I do not do anything by dishonest means. You are trying to play lawyer here in your meritless arguments and I am one. I do not need to make up anything because the case law is definitly on my side in the evidence which I proffered as taken from the docments of Vatican II. It is you who is fallible and your attempts to take Scriptural passages out of context and pervert them is fallible and a poor attempt to build you meritless case. Your case has no merit whatsoever, in as much as one moment you are claiming that the Church has complete authority over both the Bible - which you claim that the Church created rather than God and which. in reality has existed from the beginning of the ages both in the form of Christ, as the Word, and within the Torah. and then in the next you want to say that it is infallible but should maybe have had a few extra books which were not included. Which is it? The Church is emphatic that the New Testament was contained within the Old (The Law, The Torah, and especially in the Pentetuch) and that the Old was brought to fruition in the New. (SEEocuments Vat II)…

I find it amazing that one moment you are claiming that the Church has authority over Holy Scripture and in the next you are claiming that it is infallible. If the Church created the Bible then it is not infallible but a mere creation of man; please decide which position you are going to cling to and don’t vascillate. If Holy Scripture was written by the Holy Spirit who also compiled it, then it is infallible. If the Bible was only put together in the circ. 4th century then it has no validity at all, let alone infallibility, since it is merely a man-made creation and not of the Creator. Which is it? If you are going to cite from it and it is a man-made document why should anyone listen to you or to the Bible, and especially to the Church?

Next, that is not what the Scripture you quoted says. In Matt. the Lord was speaking of divorce and the reasons as to why men may not or can not marry. Thus the decison to marry is an individual decision best left to the individual. You can’t take a passage out of context without reading the entire case. Any first year law student or first year theologian would know that much. Your cited Scriptural passage only reinforces the fact that celebacy, according to the words and inferences of the Lord, should be an individual decision and not Church policy. Paul’s passage is again taken out of context. he says that " it is better for a man to marry than to burn…" Again your argument is superflous and has no merit.

I did not put words into your mouth and I have not build a strawman case as you allege but a solid case built upon both the Word of God and the documents of the very Church you purport to defend. You said it! Now, either the Church created the Bible and therefore it has no merit and no validity or authority of its own and it is man-made, or Holy Scripture - all of it - is authored by God and is the ultimate authority and has been since the Word was both carnate and incarnate. There is no middle ground. Either the Holy Spirit wrote and then decided which books to include, or He didn’t. There are no other Holy Books which were inadvertently left out by the Holy Spirit - only the ones which the Holy Spirit included.

The Church gets its money from the backs of its members, from investments, from the Vatican Bank and investments (do you remember that scandal?), from the ownership of businesses and other enterprizes. But it does not like to pay its priests very well and in some cases does not even offer health insurance and care.

I am certainly not Judas and you are no St. Peter! There have always been abuses in the Church and lots of waste while many of its members starved. As a matter of fact, the reason that Clement outlawed the Knights Templar was because he and King Phillip of France wanted their money and land. It was all about money, and power. Was that infallible, just like the Inquisition and the Concordance with Hitler? It was always about money, either getting it or hanging on to it. Just like the sale of Indulgences which prompted Father Luther to write his treatises.

Wrong again, oh fallible one, Paul said: “It is better for a man to marry than to burn…” Are you against marriage or something?

No Christ’s situation was different. He was trying to save the world and the people in it. He was not out looking for little boys! You know, while we are on it, the masonic order has never sanctioned, been involved with or committed any criminal act, nor covered one up. I can’t say that about our Church as the recent court cases will assert!

We were originally talking about Holy Scripture and God, and who was in charge; either Them or the Pope - which has authority over whom and who is really infallible. Not only about celebacy. Get your arguments straight! But, since you brought it up, show me concretly in Scripture where it says that clergy should be celebate. Maybe then I will believe something that you say, rather than taking your arguments for what they generally are.

What is your question? Yes, Holy Scripture is infallible and the Church is admonished in its own documents to be a good “Pupil” of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s admission that Holy Scripture is infallible. These are the Church’s teaching, not mine.

What about the latest version of Canon Law where the masonic order is not even mentioned? Can you give me a Scriptural quote on where it is a “grave sin” to belong to the masonic fraternity. Maybe you can find one too that applies to KoC? I would appreciate a Scriptural reference to that effect too.

Please get your act straight.