If you are a Christian, what is the real reason for you not being a Catholic? - 2

[guanophore]

Open rebellion? No, I think that’s a little strong. For some reason, some may think the Church is wrong on a particular issue, so they may disagree, but I think calling it open rebellion is a little too dramatic. BTW, a cafeteria Catholic as you call them is still a Catholic. If you are baptized Catholic, you are always Catholic. You may fall away for a time, but you are still a Catholic. Even excommunicated ones are still Catholic, they’ve just been separated from the community.

Well, ok, I guess I have to concede on the Catholic thing. But when a person becomes an enemy of the Church, it is hard to think of them that way, especially when they formally leave by joining another congregation.

Anyway, I do think there are open rebels I don’t think they are the majority, but when you look at the lifestyle of some folks who insist on persisting, even though they are in blatant disobedience (ordaining women, for example) it seems to me like rebellion against authority.

 

[guanophore]

So we get back to the first point, that being that for many there is no legitimate reason for not being Catholic. If someone believes that Catholicism is perfect then anyone ourside of it is just reflecting thier own (name removed by moderator)erfection.
I on the other hand do not see Catholicism as perfect.

Yes, you are right. And Catholic apologists would say that you do not see the perfection in the one Church founded by Christ because there is something wrong with your perceptions.

A generous person might say it is the result of ignorance, and since you do not understand what is taught, then you don’t see it’s perfection.

But, you are right, there is a pre-supposition that, if your perceptions were clear, and you are truly open to the Holy Spirit, then you would be Catholic.

I think it is also common to conflate Catholics and their behavior with the Church, which is not just a collection of such persons. The reason the Church is infallible is because she has Christ as her Head, and is ensouled by the Holy Spirit. It is the divine elements that make her perfect, not the human. The “Church” is greater than the sum of her imperfect members, and I think this gets lost somewhere also.

 

[Hesychios]

…The reason the Church is infallible is because she has Christ as her Head, and is ensouled by the Holy Spirit. It is the divine elements that make her perfect, not the human. The “Church” is greater than the sum of her imperfect members, and I think this gets lost somewhere also.

This is really good from an Orthodox Catholic perspective.

I can agree.

 

[Memaw]

These posts are off topic. This thread isnt about all that. You are wasting time and band space by tese posts.

I don’t think that decision is up to you.

 

[Memaw]

I understand to many there is no legitimate reason for not being Catholic. Yet every objection to the Catholic faith that others hold is pushed aside as not valid by these same folks.
A legitimate reason is God placing someone in another worship community.

Please, lets don’t blame all the divisions among the protestant denominations on God. There is NO division in the Catholic Faith. Even tho some of its members do not live up to their faith, the Faith is still solid and truthful. If Our Lord had HIS way all would be Cathoiic and belong to HIS one true Church.

 

[Lisdogan]

Please, lets don’t blame all the divisions among the protestant denominations on God. There is NO division in the Catholic Faith. Even tho some of its members do not live up to their faith, the Faith is still solid and truthful. If Our Lord had HIS way all would be Cathoiic and belong to HIS one true Church.

There is a deficit of logic here. God is omnipotent - He can do anything. If He had his way is not a logical proposition as He does have His way always. That is part of what ‘divine’ means.

So you cannot use this argument for this purpose, although it might seem attractive. Think again.

In Christ

 

[guanophore]

This is really good from an Orthodox Catholic perspective.

I can agree.

YAY!

:extrahappy:

That means I am making progress in my understanding of Orthodox theology.

:dancing:

Thanks!

 

[guanophore]

There is a deficit of logic here. God is omnipotent - He can do anything. If He had his way is not a logical proposition as He does have His way always. That is part of what ‘divine’ means.

So you cannot use this argument for this purpose, although it might seem attractive. Think again.

In Christ

Not a deficit of logic, but perhaps a theological difference. Catholics believe that God works in and through our free will, and that though He desires perfect unity, He allows us to reject His purpose for ourselves, and one another.

 

[mikew262]

Well, ok, I guess I have to concede on the Catholic thing. But when a person becomes an enemy of the Church, it is hard to think of them that way, especially when they formally leave by joining another congregation.

Anyway, I do think there are open rebels I don’t think they are the majority, but when you look at the lifestyle of some folks who insist on persisting, even though they are in blatant disobedience (ordaining women, for example) it seems to me like rebellion against authority.

OK, I’ll give you one back, the ordaining of women comes pretty close to open rebellion against the Church’s teachings. I would say an enemy of the Church is one working for it’s downfall. Someone who disagrees or is even in open rebellion is not necessarily looking for it’s downfall, just for it to change in the matter they are concerned about.

 

[joe370]

Continued response to Roy 5…

B]Among liberal Protestants the teaching that God the loving Father required the cruel and bloody sacrifice of his only Son to win us salvation is widely questioned. They see it as a rather bizarre role model, too close to child abuse.

Well if liberal Protestants question or doubt it, then they question and doubt Jesus Christ, according to their Bibles. Jesus wasn’t a child when He came “to Give His Life as a Ransom for Many.” He was a man, and the reason is in the bible:

*Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. **Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted. ***Hebrews 2:14

   ****(2) **The notion that the early Christians were united in one Catholic Church is disputed by even a casual reading of early ******church history**. There were dozens of popular 'heresies' -from modalism and Arianism to gnosticism and monophysitism.

Absolutely, division was rearing its ugly head right from the word go. Thanks to the C.C. guided by the Holy Spirit these heresies were quashed. These early Christian leaders were no different then you or me. They were prone to error just as all humans are. However they were being guided by the Holy Spirit, and eventually any and all disputes were resolved. Individuals within the C.C. can and will fail but the H.S. cannot! These disputes throughout the centuries were always settled at the Ecumenical councils, whose creeds affirmed the doctrines, such as the Trinity. The Trinity is a Catholic doctrine, stating that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three Divine Persons. It took almost 4 centuries for the catholic church to define this doctrine and many heretical movements opposed them. Can you imagine if the man-made doctrine of sola scriptura/private interpretation were the vehicle through which all doctrines were defined? Besides C.C. Tradition, lets look at some of the passages that the C.C. used to define it, and examine some of the difficulties the C.C. would have encountered when trying to define the Trinitarian doctrine; Lucky for them the Holy Spirit sent by Jesus was always one step ahead of the apostolic church!

“I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; From the time that it was, there am I; and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.” Isaiah 48

*“I am the way, the truth, and the life!” Jesus answered. “Without me, no one can go to the Father. If you had known me, you would have known the Father. But from now on, you do know him, and you have seen him.”
*

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen. 2 Corinthians 13:14

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. John 1:1-2

The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. Genesis 2:7

In the beginning, when God created the universe, the Spirit of God was present, over the formless matter of the physical world. Genesis 1:2

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

“But when the Comforter is come whom I will send unto you from the Father, He shall testify of me.” John 15:26

*“…baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” *(Matthew 28:19).

“Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come” (John 16:13).

“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty” (Revelation 1:8).

A few of above passages clearly prove that the Father and the Son are ONE, but what about the Holy Spirit? I totally believe in the Trinity, BECAUSE THE C.C. FOUNDED BY JESUS, GUIDED BY THE H.S. TEACHES THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY AND THEY CAN’T BE WRONG REGARDING FAITH, MORALS AND DOCTRINES, but, nowhere in the bible is it explicitly said that the H.S. is equally one with the Father and the Son.

It is clear that the H.S. has always been with God, before the universe was created. The Holy Spirit was God’s paint brush by which He formed all things:* "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the deep waters. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters. Then God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light."*

For example, Worship is offered both to the Father and to the Son. In no single case is worship ever offered to the Holy Spirit. How can this be harmonized with the supposition that the Holy Ghost is equal with both the Father and the Son?

Many times the bible explicitly declares that both the Father and the Son have a throne, and are seated upon that throne. Rev. 3:21 “But the throne of God and the Lamb shall be in it.” Rev. 22:3 But where is the throne of the Holy Spirit?

1 Corinthians 2:11and 1 Cor. 6:11 are the only verses (correct me if I’m wrong) that imply that Holy Spirit is one with the Father and the Son, but never stated explicitly like John 1:1-2 where John says, “and the Word was God.” This verse says that God possesses an all-knowing Spirit.

"this God has revealed to us through the Spirit.For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. Among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit of the person that is within? Similarly, no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God."

"And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." 1 Cor. 6:11

Of course Jesus, the Son of God certainly knows what pertains to God and there is you indirect implication. *“No one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God” *and of course Jesus, the Son of God, “the Word,”— "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.") —ergo the Trinity!

My point is if we can trust the C.C. regarding the doctrine of the Trinity (where the 3rd Divine Person of the Holy Trinity is only implicitly connected) then we can trust the church regarding other implicit doctrines such as the Immaculate Conception.

Every Christian believes that God is a Tri-unity, with each Person of the Godhead equally and fully and eternally God, because the C.C. believed it first and defined it as dogmatic. If the C.C. would have embraced a binitarian God and defined it as dogmatic, Christians today would believe that, in lieu of Trinitarianism. Each is necessary, and each is distinct, and yet all are one. The three Divine Persons appear in a logical, causal order. The Father is the unseen, omnipresent Source of all being, revealed in and by the Son, experienced in and by the Holy Spirit. The Son proceeds from the Father, and the Spirit from the Son. With reference to God’s creation, the Father is the Thought behind it, the Son is the Word calling it forth, and the Spirit is the Deed making it a reality.

Almost every Christian believes in God and His great salvation in the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, and they experience their reality by faith, through the indwelling presence of His Holy Spirit.

Though these relationships seem paradoxical, and to some completely impossible, they are profoundly realistic to Christians, and their truth is ingrained deep in their psyche because the Catholic Church, which is eternally guided by the ALL KNOWING Supreme, omnipotent, Provident GOD, the Divine, omnipotent, infallible Son of God —the WORD, and the the omnipotent, omnipresent HolySpirit—DOGMATIZED IT!!!**

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

A good example of a stupid and annoying question is the title of this thread. It is best to ignore it.

Ignoring questions that are put in convincement; in this case that Jesus founded but on church instead of many, would lack the very love that’s scaffolding Christianity, yes indeed is precondition to call oneself a Christian= Follower of Jesus Christ.

 

[Roy5]

JOE370, JESUS, CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS

 Hm! You well present traditional Catholic doctrine re Christ, the Holy Spirit, etc. A few very brief comments.

 (1) **I am amazed at how many Catholics remain Catholic but discard much of the teaching of the church**. In fact, studies indicate that the least 'believing' area of the nation is the northeast, where Catholicism tends to be strongest - places like MA, CT, RI, NY, etc. As I recall RI is the one state of the union where Catholicism is the absolute majority religion, and roughly 45% of the population of CT and MA also are Catholic. All very liberal areas, both in religion and politics. The areas that seem most committed to the Christian faith are heavily Protestant - especially the southeast.. 

 (2) **As for mainline Protestants, also strong in the northeast, many - maybe most - of them seem to care much less about the fine points of doctrine than about ethical behavior,** about following Christ rather than worshiping him. When Jesus was asked how to inherit eternal life, he said nothing about dogma but said to love God and one another. When he was pushed a bit further, he did not provide a lesson in catechism but gave the parable of the Good Samaritan. Generally, mainline Protestants strike me as less concerned about theology, more interested in how we live. Many don't hesitate to dismiss some aspects of Catholicism as mere superstition. If the Bible is quoted and they disagree with it, they dismiss those Bible quotes, too. Unlike evangelicals, they are not into sola scriptura. They believe the Bible as a whole is inspiring and perhaps inspired, but that parts of it are unimportant or even wrong (e. g., stoning people to death, women not to speak in churches, condemning non-believers to hell, etc.)  Many doubt some of Jesus' miracles - water into wine, walking on water, feeding 5000, raising Lazarus. Their Bible study groups seem to encourage diversity in thinking rather than agreement. The old Protestant idea of individual interpretation of scripture.

** To fit this thread, I am suggesting that many mainline Protestants have a very different focus than either Catholics or evangelical Protestants**. As for evangelical Protestants, they are much into theology (generally) and seem ready to engage in verse for verse dialogue wih Catholics. Remember the old adage: “Even the devil can quote scripture.” This is not to say that the evangelicals are devilish, only that scripture is not always clear. I’ve often wondered: if God wanted us all to believe the same way - all of us Catholics - why didn’t He make scripture clearer? That’s one reason I feel that God must be very gentle when it comes to judging people by their faith. There is enough ‘ammunition’ in the Bible for a variety of interpretations.

 

[Memaw]

There is a deficit of logic here. God is omnipotent - He can do anything. If He had his way is not a logical proposition as He does have His way always. That is part of what ‘divine’ means.

So you cannot use this argument for this purpose, although it might seem attractive. Think again.

In Christ

Hummmmm, wonder why HE gave mankind a freewill then if it doesn’t matter what he does with it. While God is Divine, of course HE has complete control over His creation but he does not force that on us. HE is DIVINE, we are NOT. While HIS Divine Will has a plan for each of us, His permissive Will allows us to make our own choices and so reach our own place in eternity. And so we pray. Maybe you should think again. Again, I repeat, IF God had his Will, we would ALL be Catholic and the fullness of TRUTH.

 

[mikew262]

Ignoring questions that are put in convincement; in this case that Jesus founded but on church instead of many, would lack the very love that’s scaffolding Christianity, yes indeed is precondition to call oneself a Christian= Follower of Jesus Christ.

Something to think about, maybe Christ founded one Church, called Christianity, of which we now have many slices, Catholicism being the main one.

 

[Memaw]

Something to think about, maybe Christ founded one Church, called Christianity, of which we now have many slices, Catholicism being the main one.

Dream on, Adam and Eve made excuses for their sin too, but that didn’t change the consequences. From the very beginning, man has tried to get around God’s plan for him and he only succeeded in getting farther away from His Plan. When will we ever learn!!

 

[guanophore]

Something to think about, maybe Christ founded one Church, called Christianity, of which we now have many slices, Catholicism being the main one.

This doesn’t not require much thought. Jesus prayed for unity, and taught His Apotles unity. He founded one Church, and it is, by defninition, united. The Church is His Body, and He never intended for it to be “sliced”.

 

[mikew262]

Dream on, Adam and Eve made excuses for their sin too, but that didn’t change the consequences.

What are you talking about and how does that relate to what I said? I sense your sarcasm, but lost your point.

 

[NotWorthy]

This doesn’t not require much thought. Jesus prayed for unity, and taught His Apotles unity. He founded one Church, and it is, by defninition, united. The Church is His Body, and He never intended for it to be “sliced”.

Excatly!!!

And Paul demonstrates this when he questions the Corinthians for following different leaders. *** I mean that each of you is saying, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.***”

There is ONE CHURCH!!!

 

[NotWorthy]

What are you talking about and how does that relate to what I said? I sense your sarcasm, but lost your point.

And better case for Memaw’s point is following the 10 tribes of Israel who broke off from the 2 southern tribes after Solomon’s death. They tried to re-create the form of worship that God established and basically messed it all up.

Most Protestant churches have removed the altar, removed the Sacrifice, turned the Lord’s Supper as a simple remembrance, and replaced them with things akin to what Israel did in Dan and Bethel. They also removed the priesthood (since there is no sacrifice anymore) which removed the Sacrament of Confession.

 

[mikew262]

This doesn’t not require much thought. Jesus prayed for unity, and taught His Apotles unity. He founded one Church, and it is, by defninition, united. The Church is His Body, and He never intended for it to be “sliced”.

Think about it for a second. Whether you are a Catholic or a Methodist, if you are a follower of Christ, you are a Christian. In that sense, we are all united. In the very early days of Christianity, everybody was just a Christian, period. Eventually, different sects of Christianity broke out, all were eliminated (some violently), or faded away, and the Catholic Church became the dominate form of Christianity. Then the Reformation happened…

Get my point?