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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe you should take time to really learn about your Catholic Faith before you try so hard to convince us that one church is as good as another. The Catholic Church is not in competition with any one. She is the ONE TRUE Church and thats that. Like it or not, its the truth. So you can go on and on but that won’t change the truth. The Catholic Church has the fullness of truth, how much better can you get? She is not in the habit of looking down at others like you seem to think but she does have the responsibility to teach the TRUTH. Boy you really need to read St. Paul. This is a year dedicated to St. Paul, why don’t you make it your goal to study him. I really doubt he would have endured all he did if it didn’t really make any difference what one believed. If you follow the TRUTH, all roads lead to Rome, (the Vatican.) God Bless, Memaw.
Oh please. If you believe the sun is green because that is your faith, and if you beat up on those who do not agree with your interpretation of the colour of the sun, the world is going to hell in a handcart.

This goes round and round and round while Christians on both sides of the fence urge patience, understanding and ecumenism. I have recently been received into the Catholic Church, but would never, ever deny the choice of any Christian as to denomination. We are all Christians, in Christ.

In Christ
 
I think this is perhaps uninformed and biased opinion - for example suggesting that a Christian community would by preference revert to paganism. It is preferable to create a firm foundation if you are going to throw stones . (How’s that for a mixed metaphor with biblical meanings!)

In Christ
Sad to say many denominations are sliding towards paganism. Accepting abortion, birth control, divorce and remarrage, homosexuality as another lifestyle, even in their ministry. They have given up sooo much when they left the Catholic Faith and they keep getting farther and farther away. In one of the posts someone ,a non-catholic I believe, even said some left the protestant church and don’t like bring called a protestant. So where do the go from here? Breaking away from the Catholic Faith was not a wise thing to do and I don’t see why they can’t see that. With all the opportunities today to learn the truth about the Catholic Faith, it baffles me that even many Catholics do not know their faith properly. We have EWTN, Catholic Answers, Catholic Radio stations, many great books like Surprised by Truth vol. 1,2 & 3 (by Patrick Madrid), Scott Haun, (a former anti Catholic minister) and sooo many more great resources. It is a great and challenging time to be a Catholic today. The opportunities are there if one wishes to see them.
 
Surely the conclusion then is the proposition that he allowed Catholic Christians to use their free will to follow Luther and his brethren into the protestant communion?

Would this conclusion not be antithetical to the faith of any Catholic Christian?

I have, further, been assured that God - omnipotent, omniscient, eternal - knows all including the future. Would he have allowed this foreseeable destructive separation to take place - knowingly - as a sop to humankind’s individual and/or collective free will?

In Christ
HE allowed Adam and Eve to commit the original sin didn’t HE?? And look where that got them and us!! Don’t you think HE was Omnipotent and Omniscient and Eternal, then as now??
 
Sad to say many denominations are sliding towards paganism. Accepting abortion, birth control, divorce and remarrage, homosexuality as another lifestyle, even in their ministry. They have given up sooo much when they left the Catholic Faith and they keep getting farther and farther away. In one of the posts someone ,a non-catholic I believe, even said some left the protestant church and don’t like bring called a protestant. So where do the go from here? Breaking away from the Catholic Faith was not a wise thing to do and I don’t see why they can’t see that. With all the opportunities today to learn the truth about the Catholic Faith, it baffles me that even many Catholics do not know their faith properly. We have EWTN, Catholic Answers, Catholic Radio stations, many great books like Surprised by Truth vol. 1,2 & 3 (by Patrick Madrid), Scott Haun, (a former anti Catholic minister) and sooo many more great resources. It is a great and challenging time to be a Catholic today. The opportunities are there if one wishes to see them.
 
Maybe you should take time to really learn about your Catholic Faith before you try so hard to convince us that one church is as good as another. The Catholic Church is not in competition with any one. She is the ONE TRUE Church and thats that. Like it or not, its the truth. So you can go on and on but that won’t change the truth. The Catholic Church has the fullness of truth, how much better can you get? She is not in the habit of looking down at others like you seem to think but she does have the responsibility to teach the TRUTH. Boy you really need to read St. Paul. This is a year dedicated to St. Paul, why don’t you make it your goal to study him. I really doubt he would have endured all he did if it didn’t really make any difference what one believed. If you follow the TRUTH, all roads lead to Rome, (the Vatican.) God Bless, Memaw.
Sigh! :nope: You’re not getting it, and I tire of trying to make my point with you. God Bless you as well.

Let me leave you with one thought. I’m a Christian first, the Catholic Church is simply how I exercise my Christianity. I try (and I fail sometimes) not to judge how somebody else exercise’s their Christianity (or whatever belief they have). If they (or I, or you) am wrong, the enlightenment will come soon enough.
 
HE allowed Adam and Eve to commit the original sin didn’t HE?? And look where that got them and us!! Don’t you think HE was Omnipotent and Omniscient and Eternal, then as now??
Yes, He is O and O and E and many other things besides.

And he certainly had nothing to do with Adam and Eve, as much as that would satisfy many as to the origin of sin. It is somewhat more complicated than that.

In Christ
 
The answer would be that it is not the perceptions that are imperfect but the paradigm set up by the Catholic Church about itself that is false.
I do not have the slightest doubt that te Catholic Curch is not te same assembly that was present in the 1st century. The very corruption of the term ekklesia to fit the definition that the CC has given itself—yes it is self given not God given.

A generous person would say that Catholics are just repeating what they have been taught and are locked into this false paradigm out of a desire to follow some form of “absolute truth”.
There may be some that equate the behavior of individuals with that of the Cathholic Church but my concern is the behavior of the Cathoic Church as it pertains to the protecting individuals who are in error thus corrupting the whole institution.
I say this in regards to protecting those that missused their authoirty in denying the common man a bible written in the venacular. The false assertion that this prevented the spread of heresy does not pass the smell test.
Wrong! The Bible was released in the vernacular long before Wycliff and Martin Luther. You may want to check your facts again, but use a more honest and not anti-catholic website. Bad form.
Also the protection of those who spread the false doctirne of indulgences.
I wasn’t aware that indulgences were false doctrines.
We saw this princiaple acted out before our eyes as it regards to child sex abuse by the clergy.
How long did this persist and was covered up by high level officials before it was exposed? Would it have been exposed had CC officials had more authority than the state or when there was not the wide spread coverage by the secular press as was the case in generations past?
And this has what to do with the teaching of the Church rather than certain individuals?
“and the gates of hell will not prevail against it”
Is said about Christs Assembly that is all of us who follow Christ. How do I know Im a follower of Christ? because I have been given His Spirit. I am part of Christs Assembly and an equal part not a greater part. It is time for Catholics to stop grieving Christ and “discern His body” which is all that are in Him.
Yeah, that’s what Paul said to the Corinithians. “I know some of you are doing it differently, but that’s OK, as long as you follow Christ!”.

Its all clear to me now!
 
NotWorthy the UCC is not my church. I think you implied it was. Probably my fault by saying UCC (UCC is simply the largest or close to largest Protestant church in Canada. I guess Anglican are big too) so many times. We have many OTHER protestant churches as I said before.
I’m sorry, I guess I jumped to that conclusion. But the point remains… the UCC’s teaching is led by the “faithful”, in other words, public opinion.
I do not purport to know all about the Reformation but I do believe it was a result of RCC behavior.
Both sides were wrong. But Martin Luther should have remained in the Church to fix any problems, rather than breaking up the Body of Christ.
I actually just recently came from backpacking around Greece and Turkey(much better than Greece in every way i can think of), and learned about the Greek Orthodox Church. The problem I have is that they are disgustingly corrupt there (It is so bad there). The Priests get paid lots of money (ask a Greek. Many are fed up with it) so they can walk around with a funny hat and clad in all black. So no I am not interested in Orthodox Greek either but would be maybe if they weren’t so corrupt.
I wasn’t aware of that. I’ve got issues with the Greek Church myself, but that’s not good for the forums.
celticcrusader, I would be interested in taking such a course. But in order to teach at a RCC in Ontario I am apparently required to be a RCC and show a certificate and maybe more. It sucks but i sort of understand. I just want to teach mathematics though haha.
I assume you understand the reasoning behind the rule. I’ve heard of some Catholic schools that hired atheists to teach Church History. It’s incredible!
 
Jesus founded an assembly the Catholic Church has distorted Christs teachings so as to justify itself.
If you are truely a follower of Christ then you would recognize His own.
An assembly is not a small unit of people. It’s the entire Church as one body. Israel several times was referred to as assembly. It’s a Church, no matter how many times you deny it, or try to recreate it.
 
We are in unity as long as we are in Christ. We are one. When one group demands that it is head and that this group attempts ot lord over other groups and corrupts Christs teahings to justify itself then one has to ask is this group “In Christ”?
I guess you would classify the Apostles in this group? How about Timothy and all the successors of the Apostles? Have you even studied the early -]Assem/-], er, Church?
 
Some believe that Christ founded the universal Christian church, of which the Catholic Church is part, along with many other denominations. The universal Church of Christ was not originally designated the ‘Catholic Church’, because that name did not exist for some decades.

If you think the claim is ‘ridiculous’ then perhaps it is up to you - for a change - to provide proof of your claim.

In Christ, for Christendom
Well, like I said, the first recorded rendering of the Church as “Catholic” was by Ignatius around 110 AD. Now, in Ignatius’ letter, does he call the Church Catholic and then go on to explain it? No. He simply moves on. What does that tell you? It probably tells you that the word had already been used. Now, in regards to the spread of it. Are there any recordings of the Church Fathers questioning this term “Catholic”? None that we know of. This would indicate that the term “Catholic” was accepted by all.

Now, back to Ignatius. He was the third bishop of Antioch. The first being St. Peter. Although it’s not known for sure that Ignatius knew St. Peter, it is known that he studied under St. John the Apostle.

So, I would prefer to use his term Catholic Church (singular) to describe the early assembly over the recent heresy that there were numerous churches around at the time, all professing a belief in Christ.

You see a similar belief in St. Clement’s writings around 90AD. He wrote to the Church in Corinth excoriating them for replacing the Apostolically Succeeded bishop and priests with those of their own (a practice exercised today in numerous Protestant churches today - if we don’t like you, we’ll replace you - which makes it difficult for a preacher to preach the truth, since it’s sometimes hard to accept!).

It should be noted that the Apostle John was still alive during this time, and he lived closer to Corinth than the bishop of Rome. And yet, Rome, told the Church in Corinth how the cow chewed the fat.

Now, where is there any proof that there was any church other than the Catholic Church during these times?
 
I think this is perhaps uninformed and biased opinion - for example suggesting that a Christian community would by preference revert to paganism. It is preferable to create a firm foundation if you are going to throw stones . (How’s that for a mixed metaphor with biblical meanings!)

In Christ
I’m not suggesting that they reverted to paganism. I explained that in a different post (and may have assumed everyone read it, which is my bad), and I apologize to anyone who took my words that way.

My only point is that they completely re-created the form of Liturgical worship of ancient Israel, just as Protestantism has done to the Mass (in most, but not all cases - the Anglican Mass comes to mind).
 
Its all a matter of interpretation. The Catholic Church can provide justification for it’s teachings, the same as I’m sure your church can.

As I’m sure you’ve noticed, I’ve railed against a few of my fellow Catholics for their narrow-minded views (IMO) of fellow non-Catholic Christians. The same goes for non-Catholics who view the Catholic Church as wrong. To me it’s silly to criticize each other. It doesn’t accomplish anything positive, it just continues the same old prejudices.

We are all Christians who believe the same basic things; we just happen to worship Christ differently. Is this so wrong? If you don’t agree how the Catholics worship, fine. Be happy with how you worship God, but don’t put down others on how they do it. This goes for everybody (including me).
And some on here think I’m to strong in what I say. . I don’t think I have ever “railed” against any one. I may not agree how they state things and I do try to clarify what the Church teaches, but I have never said anything against others sincerity. Why do you think I have something against protestants as fellow pilgrims on the journey towards eternity? I think is an unkind assumption on your part. As I said before, I married two of them. I would like nothing better than to share the Catholic Faith with everyone, Catholics and non-catholics alike. I am a bit shocked that some Catholics on the forum don’t feel the same way. Maybe if we Catholics were all on the same wave length, ( the teachings of the Catholic Church), we could help others understand the faith and overcome some of the false ideas they have.

This idea that we are all Christians who believe the same basic things is really a false statement. While we do share some of the same beliefs of sorts, there are some very serious differences that separate us from them, and it doesn’t help a bit to gloss over these difference as tho they don’t exist. A few of the MOST important ones are Apostolic Succession, the Mass and Holy Eucharist and Confession. And there are soo many other differences. The Holy Father has said many times we must evangelize without compromising our Catholic Faith. Are we to be content to let them drink from a puddle when we have the Stream of Living Water to share? Please, get off you high horse and start, studying your Catholic Faith in its TRUTH. and then share it with EVERYONE.
 
Yes, He is O and O and E and many other things besides.

And he certainly had nothing to do with Adam and Eve, as much as that would satisfy many as to the origin of sin. It is somewhat more complicated than that.

In Christ
Thats funny, I thought HE talked to them quite frequently. Your right, Lucifer was the first to rebel, but Adam and Eve were the first human beings to sin. That makes it original for us.
 
Originally Posted by Roy5 View Post

(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.

Roy, I enjoyed the first part but;

God does want us to believe the same way, thats why Jesus founded one Church. And the Catholic Church does give us the right understanding of Sacred Scripture if we listen to Her. Self interpretation is what causes so much confusion. God Bless, Memaw
 
Some believe that Christ founded the universal Christian church, of which the Catholic Church is part, along with many other denominations.
The universal Church of Christ was not originally designated the ‘Catholic Church’, because that name did not exist for some decades.

If you think the claim is ‘ridiculous’ then perhaps it is up to you - for a change - to provide proof of your claim.

The burden of proof is on you since you are making the claim that Jesus established the C.C. as well as other denomination circa 33A.D.

Every single church, protestant,non-Catholic, non-denominational —what ever they go by nominally (outside the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church) can only trace its origin back to a mere-man, and that is a fact! --Not to Jesus; Not to the Apostles!

You name the church and I will provide you with its founder and when it was founded. The bible states unequivocally that Jesus Christ built one church, and it went by the name catholic as early as A.D. 110:

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains . Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2”

Early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes: “As regards ‘Catholic,’ its original meaning was ‘universal’ or ‘general.’ . . . in the latter half of the second century at latest, we find it conveying the suggestion that the Catholic is the true Church as distinct from heretical congregations (cf., e.g., Muratorian Canon). . . . What these early Fathers were envisaging was almost always the empirical, visible society; they had little or no inkling of the distinction which was later to become important between a visible and an invisible Church” (Early Christian Doctrines, 190–1).

The Lutheran church is the oldest protestant church. Lutheranism is a major branch of Western Christianity that identifies with the teachings of the sixteenth-century German reformer Martin Luther. Luther’s efforts to reform the theology and practice of the Roman Catholic Church launched the Protestant Reformation and, though it was not his original intention, left Western Christianity forever divided.

Jesus said his Church would be “the light of the world.” He then noted that “a city set on a hill cannot be hid” (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. Jesus promised, “I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18). This means that his Church will never be destroyed and will never fall away from him. His Church will survive until his return.

Among the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today’s Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.)

Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.

Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches that send out door-to-door missionaries are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. Some even began during your own lifetime. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established.

The Catholic Church has existed for nearly 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church’s divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, especially considering that its human members— even some of its leaders—have been unwise, corrupt, or prone to heresy.

Any merely human organization with such members would have collapsed early on. The Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with a billion members: one sixth of the human race), and that is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church’s leaders, but to the protection of the Holy Spirit.
 
The answer would be that it is not the perceptions that are imperfect but the paradigm set up by the Catholic Church about itself that is false.
I am not sure what “paradigm” you are describing here. Can you elaborate? It seems to me that the Catholic Church functions under the definition given to her by Christ, built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets. That would be a paradigm revealed by God, and not 'set up by itself".
I do not have the slightest doubt that te Catholic Curch is not te same assembly that was present in the 1st century. The very corruption of the term ekklesia to fit the definition that the CC has given itself—yes it is self given not God given.
What do you think is different? Since the term was coined by Christ, how can you say it is 'self-given"?
A generous person would say that Catholics are just repeating what they have been taught and are locked into this false paradigm out of a desire to follow some form of “absolute truth”.
I suppose this is true. Is there something wrong with wanting absolute Truth? What is false about that?
There may be some that equate the behavior of individuals with that of the Cathholic Church but my concern is the behavior of the Cathoic Church as it pertains to the protecting individuals who are in error thus corrupting the whole institution.
Can you explain what you mean by this? How has the Church done this? It seems that you are confusing the sinful members of the Church with the Holy Bride of Christ, who is pure and incorrupt. :confused:
I say this in regards to protecting those that missused their authoirty in denying the common man a bible written in the venacular.
Are you saying you are not Catholic because you have been wrongly taught about history?
The false assertion that this prevented the spread of heresy does not pass the smell test. Also the protection of those who spread the false doctirne of indulgences.
How do you see that these corrupted persons were protected? Have you ever read the documents from the Council of Trent?
We saw this princiaple acted out before our eyes as it regards to child sex abuse by the clergy.
How long did this persist and was covered up by high level officials before it was exposed? Would it have been exposed had CC officials had more authority than the state or when there was not the wide spread coverage by the secular press as was the case in generations past?
This does not make any sense. You are denying the Truth of Christ because of the behavior of sinful men? This is like saying that all Christ taught was bunk because Judas betrayed Him. 🤷
“and the gates of hell will not prevail against it”
Is said about Christs Assembly that is all of us who follow Christ.
Yes? Do you think that Jesus was too weak to keep His promise?
How do I know Im a follower of Christ? because I have been given His Spirit. I am part of Christs Assembly and an equal part not a greater part. It is time for Catholics to stop grieving Christ and “discern His body” which is all that are in Him.
It sounds like you are saying that Catholics do not recognize the members of the Body of Christ, and that such recognition grieves Christ. If this is what you are saying, then you don’t know what the Church teaches. It seems like you are upset about many things that are inacurate.

I am glad you are here at CAF, and I pray that you may be purged of your misconceptions.
:byzsoc:
 
I do not purport to know all about the Reformation but I do believe it was a result of RCC behavior.
I hope you will learn more about your family history. Actually, I think the Reformation had a number of factors, but very few of them were RCC behavior. There were people, purporting to be RCC, who acted in greed, lust for power and control, and base wickedness that fomented the Reformation. If they had been behaving like Catholics, the Reformation would never have happened!
So no I am not interested in Orthodox Greek either but would be maybe if they weren’t so corrupt.
I think it is essential to distinguish between the Truth, and the occasionally corrupt persons who claim to represent that truth. If Jesus’ teachings were judged by those who departed from Him, we would not have a Church at all!
I would be interested in taking such a course. But in order to teach at a RCC in Ontario I am apparently required to be a RCC and show a certificate and maybe more. It sucks but i sort of understand. I just want to teach mathematics though haha.
It is enough of a travesty to have so called Catholics teaching in Catholic schools that do not represent the Faith of Jesus. To have someone who is openly in rebellion against Christ by virtue of rejecting those whom He has sent would make even less sense. 🤷

However, you are clearly sincere in your faith and vocation, so you will be in my prayers.
 
We are in unity as long as we are in Christ. We are one. When one group demands that it is head and that this group attempts ot lord over other groups and corrupts Christs teahings to justify itself then one has to ask is this group “In Christ”?
Can you please show where a “group demands that it is head”?

I am assuming that you are talking about the Catholic Church, but I have not read this anywhere in the Church documents.

Can you please show how “this group attempts to lord it over other groups”? I am not aware of the Church “lording” anything, and I am not sure what you mean by that.

Could you please explain where “this group corrupts Christ’s teachings to justify itself”?

And finally, can you please explain, in the light of your apparent hostility toward Catholicism, you are posting on a Catholic forum?
 
One pizza is made up of many slices.
God is **three **persons in one God and they are one.
I agree, but the Trinity is an undivided unity. Your own posts reflect how much division exists in your own heart and mind toward the Catholic Church. It is clear that you want no part of what you think Catholicism is. 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top