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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I haven’t a clue what you are saying.

Can you give a yes or a no answer to this question:

Is it possible for a catholic to clearly understand what the catholic church teaches, reject that teaching and leave the church?
I’ve been lurking and would like to give a yes answer to this question. But I think this would be because of a poorly formed conscience, human weakness, and/or pride. You state the person is already a catholic. If baptized, he possesses the gift of faith. And he clearly understands what the church teaches, so he isn’t invinceably(?) ignorant. But if he is strongly tempted to a lifestyle that the church teaches is sinful he may not be able to remain in the church because of his discomfort with something in himself he feels unable to change. He wants to be accepted by God so why not go to another Christian church which accepts him as he is.

Say a husband divorces his wife. She says, “Why should I suffer for his sin. I have met a good man who wants to marry me. Why should I go thru an annulment investigation. etc.” She clearly understands that she can’t marry in the church unless an investigation shows that there was some impediment at the time of her first marriage. But she just isn’t willing bother or to risk finding out she is still bound to her first husband. So she has a nice wedding in another church which isn’t so picky.

I just had a thought, someone could understand what the church teaches but finds it irrelevant because understanding isn’t faith. If the person hasn’t personally encountered Jesus, church just wouldn’t matter.
 
I think only the Orthodox and some Anglicans believe as Catholics do. And, to be honest and not wishing to offend, to Catholics and Orthodox the Protestant communion services are a symbolic remembrance of the last supper motivated by the desire to do what Jesus commanded when He said, “Do this in memory of Me.” But only Catholic and Orthodox priests have the God given power to actually make Jesus present because He entrusted this to the apostles and those they ordained down through the ages. Just believing in the Real Presence isn’t enough if He isn’t present in that way.
I guess we have nothing to discuss then. Even if I believe in the Real Presence (which I do, in body and in blood), I don’t have it anyway in your eyes. What’s the point?
I think you use the term ‘real presence’ differently than Catholics do. We would say Jesus is really there in the Protestant service because you are praying and wanting to do His will, but this is a spiritual presence. But that He is physically, in His resurrected body, bodily present in the Catholic and Orthodox sacrament under the appearance of bread and wine.
It is more than spiritual presence. The official statement of my denomination says so. I suspect that isn’t good enough in your eyes. Again, I suspect there is no point to this conversation.
This probably seems like splitting hairs to you and that we must think we are better than Protestants. I’m ashamed that I know many Protestants who are better than I am and love Jesus more than I do and do more for God and others than I do. I am inspired by them to live my faith more. But I still wish they were Catholic because I believe that this is the church Jesus established.
I don’t know what to tell you. Blessings to you and yours, and may the Lord be with you.

O+
 
For the doubting Thomas’s that have diffulculty in believing what Jesus told us in the Bible.

Eucharistic Miracle
Lanciano, Italy 8th Century A.D.

Ancient Anxanum, the city of the Frentanese, has contained for over twelve centuries the first and greatest Eucharistic Miracle of the Catholic Church. This wondrous Event took place in the 8th century A.D. in the little Church of St. Legontian, as a divine response to a Basilian monk’s doubt about Jesus’ Real Presence in the Eucharist.

During Holy Mass, after the two-fold consecration, the host was changed into live Flesh and the wine was changed into live Blood, which coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size.

The Host-Flesh, as can be very distinctly observed today, has the same dimensions as the large host used today in the Latin church; it is light brown and appears rose-colored when lighted from the back.

The Blood is coagulated and has an earthy color resembling the yellow of ochre.

Various ecclesiastical investigation (“Recognitions”) were conducted since 1574.

In 1970-'71 and taken up again partly in 1981 there took place a scientific investigation by the most illustrious scientist Prof. Odoardo Linoli, eminent Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy. He was assisted by Prof. Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena.

The analyses were conducted with absolute and unquestionable scientific precision and they were documented with a series of microscopic photographs.
These analyses sustained the following conclusions:

The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.

The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.

The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.

In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.

The Flesh is a “HEART” complete in its essential structure.

The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).

In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.

In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.

The preservation of the Flesh and of the Blood, which were left in their natural state for twelve centuries and exposed to the action of atmospheric and biological agents, remains an extraordinary phenomenon.
 
I guess we have nothing to discuss then. Even if I believe in the Real Presence (which I do, in body and in blood), I don’t have it anyway in your eyes. What’s the point?

It is more than spiritual presence. The official statement of my denomination says so. I suspect that isn’t good enough in your eyes. Again, I suspect there is no point to this conversation.

I don’t know what to tell you. Blessings to you and yours, and may the Lord be with you.

O+
I think you originally said that you couldn’t become Catholic because of them having a closed eucharist. Is the issue more that the Catholic church’s understanding, that the command to do this sacrament was given only to the apostles and those who succeed to their office, is offensive?

The Catholic church permits its members to take communion in an Orthodox divine liturgy since their patriarchs are also successors to the apostles. However, we would only do so in extreme cases and with the permission of the Orthodox clergy because we are aware that the Orthodox do not permit this as a general rule. We respect their authority and also realize that we are not in the complete union with them that communion signifies.

The fact is that we aren’t in complete union with United Methodists either. We can pray with each other at each other’s services. As brother Christians we have much more in common than not. I guess I have been really blunt but usually I’m only online late at night when my internal censors aren’t very active. I didn’t mean to cut off any dialog.

I pray (and believe) that God is with you too.
 
I have been a Christian all of my life, and ordained for over 1/2 of my life. If I were party to withholding the body and blood of Christ - the main instruments and means of God’s grace, and God’s self-giving - from another Christian, I would fear for my very soul.

There is no doubt that Christians are not in complete union with each other. But that impediment should not prevent us from sharing the very meal that Christ gave us to be in union with him. It is his body, and it is his blood. Even Peter and Judas were served with the full knowledge that Christ knew they would both deny and betray him. Judas failed. Peter was redeemed and became the first Pope. It wasn’t a perfect body of disciples, but they went on to perfection.

So shall we, with God’s help. I would rather err on the side of God being able to redeem anything - even an imperfect body.

O+
 
O S Luke,

First God Bless You,

While the Catholic Church recognizes the Baptism of your faith into the Christian Community it was a protest by the Protestant reformation that seperated the union.
The reason why you cannot receive the Body,Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus within the Catholic Church is because #1 you do not believe in confession and absolution of sins by a priest.

Those sins you forgive are forgiven Those sins you retained are retained

Now even though this is clear as day to anyone who reads the bible and w/o mumbo jumbo in an attempt to rationalize it means just that giving the Apostles and their successors the ability to forgive and retain sin esspecially those they do not hear.

Now without absolution from mortal sin one cannot receive communion in the Catholic Church not even a Catholic.

You keep yourself from receiving the Body,Blood.Soul, and Divinty of Jesus Christ on this earth by your continued seperation from Christ’s Church

Please hurry and make the journey back home

Vaya Con Dios
 
I have been a Christian all of my life, and ordained for over 1/2 of my life. If I were party to withholding the body and blood of Christ - the main instruments and means of God’s grace, and God’s self-giving - from another Christian, I would fear for my very soul.

There is no doubt that Christians are not in complete union with each other. But that impediment should not prevent us from sharing the very meal that Christ gave us to be in union with him. It is his body, and it is his blood. Even Peter and Judas were served with the full knowledge that Christ knew they would both deny and betray him. Judas failed. Peter was redeemed and became the first Pope. It wasn’t a perfect body of disciples, but they went on to perfection.

So shall we, with God’s help. I would rather err on the side of God being able to redeem anything - even an imperfect body.

O+
I can only admire what you say.

In your church, are all of any age free to receive the eucharist? Must they be baptized? Be taught? Profess a common faith? Profess faith that this is the body of Christ? Do you invite all visitors to receive? What about good Christians who believe this is only a symbol? Do you worry that eating without discerning the body and blood of the Lord might be injurious to their souls? Do you consume all of the consecrated species? If not, do you have a tabernacle so that the body of Christ can be taken to the sick or the dying? Do you have communion often? Is what you do characteristic of other United Methodist churches? Do the other pastors believe the same as you? Do you say the same words as Catholic priests to consecrate? The epiclesis you use is not the same. These are questions I always wondered about.
 
I can only admire what you say.

In your church, are all of any age free to receive the eucharist? Must they be baptized? Be taught? Profess a common faith? Profess faith that this is the body of Christ? Do you invite all visitors to receive? What about good Christians who believe this is only a symbol? Do you worry that eating without discerning the body and blood of the Lord might be injurious to their souls? Do you consume all of the consecrated species? If not, do you have a tabernacle so that the body of Christ can be taken to the sick or the dying? Do you have communion often? Is what you do characteristic of other United Methodist churches? Do the other pastors believe the same as you? Do you say the same words as Catholic priests to consecrate? The epiclesis you use is not the same. These are questions I always wondered about.
I posted the official statement of my church earlier - This Holy Mystery. I cannot be responsible for the actions of others any more than you can be responsible for Catholics who use birth control or don’t believe in Transubstantiation.
 
I posted the official statement of my church earlier - This Holy Mystery. I cannot be responsible for the actions of others any more than you can be responsible for Catholics who use birth control or don’t believe in Transubstantiation.
I went back and read all of what you posted. It answered some of my questions. Would you satisfy my curiosity about the others:
In your congregation, are all of any age free to receive the eucharist? I assume they are baptized. Are there classes for children and new members before receiving their first communion or does the pastor just talk with them first? Do they profess faith that this is the body of Christ like we say amen when the priest says Body of Christ? Do you consume all of the consecrated species? If not, do you have a tabernacle so that the body of Christ can be taken to the sick or the dying? Do you have communion often, every Sunday? Do you say the same words as Catholic priests to consecrate? (The epiclesis you use is not the same and I couldn’t tell exactly what prayer you use). I have been to Methodist services but not one with communion. Thanks.
 
I still consider myself Catholic, although not Roman Catholic. I was raised Roman Catholic for most of my life. For the first 18 years or so of my life, I had no real interest in Catholicism. For the most part, I thought Catholicism was not pertinent to my life. Confirmation was the one exception. For some reason, I felt this was of a special significance. In any case, during high school, I stopped going to church altogether. I worked Friday and Saturday nights and wanted Sunday mornings to sleep in and rest up. I was quite busy then. At about 17-18, I started delving into ancient literature in my free time. I started reading books by the Greek historians, and then by non-Greek ones, such as Josephus.

At one point, I decided to read the Bible itself. I was drawn in by the historical books. After this, I simply began to read the Bible in its entirety. However, rather than become fundamentalist Christian (as some who discover the Bible do) I became more and more interested in the Catholic faith by which I was raised. I knew that the Protestants were a-ahistorical, and I knew that their faith sounded much different from the faith of the Apostolic Fathers.

I started attending Mass more and more frequently. One summer, I attended daily Mass at the local cathedral. But while I was intellectually convinced, something was not right. I was having a lot of problems at college. People were crazy, and I was trying, seemingly alone, to live a Catholic Christian life. I went to Newman Club, but nobody, not even the priest, seemed genuinely interested in learning more and living out the Catholic Faith to the fullest. I asked the priest questions about Christ’s divinity, his humanity, and the so forth, but father shrugged these questions off. He later claimed that he often wonders if God even exists.

About this time, I discovered a small group within the diocese, a group that seemed genuinely interested in living out the Catholic faith and abiding to the Magisterium. The charismatic Catholic group provided me with a lot of support and kindness. They truly desired to have a living, prayerful relationship with the Lord. But I could never bring myself to accept what they believed. Something was not right. I was baptized in the Holy Spirit, but I did not feel comfortable about it at all. Soon afterwards, I left the group.

Soon thereafter, I began my studies at a Catholic university. I never fit into the spiritual landscape. It too was very charismatic, whereas I considered myself more of a traditionalist, although not a radical one. To make the story short, I started attending an Eastern Catholic church. I learned lot about Eastern Catholic theology. I began viewing the Roman Catholic Church more critically. A lot of what it said added up, but still I had the feeling that something was not entirely right. I started attending a few TLM’s to see what the Catholic Mass used to be like. A vast difference from the Novus Ordo, even one done in Latin. Modern Catholicism had one appearance, the traditional Catholicism had another. The one holding arms out to the world, the other in perpetual conflict with it.

Eventually I found my way to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I’m glad I did. I feel like I belong here, and I actually believe, and not just intellectually, what the Church teaches.
 
OK, you got me, I left the Catholic Church to whore around for 3 years…or was it four? I was drinking so much, I guess I lost track of time.

I stopped drinking when my 4th husband threatened to divorce me, but then I left him for the pool boy.

What do you think would happen if a Protestant started a thread like this? What if I had said that most men who become Priests do it to gain trusted access to little boys?

I think it’s time for me to leave this forum. The judgemental, self-righteous, and moral superior attitude is beginning to make me ill.
You being an alcholic and after four husbands, I hope you get help.

Go in peace.
 
Good Morning,

If a Catholic does not believe in trans-substansiation then that person is absolutely without a doubt not a Catholic. Anything else as I would understand would be professing a heresy and removing themselves out of communion with the Catholic Church.

A Catholic taking birth Control would remove him or her self from receiving the Sacraments as this would be a mortal sin non compliance with Church Teaching. Thus leaving oneself unable to repent. That is to turn away from sin and promise to try to not commit the same sin again as your intention is to continue to take that pill or use the prophallactic. To receive for instance Holy Communion in the Catholic Church would be a sacralidge, breaking a promise you are making to God, and being a hypocrite.
For when we profess our faith it is One Holy, Xatholic, and Apostolic Church—Unity----

To be a Catholic in true communion with Jesus’s Church is not an easy task but then again Jesus said it would not be easy.

However that would not stop one from asking Jesus to receive him spiritually and going to Mass. All the while praying for forgiveness and direction.

To mgrfin

I apoloigize for anyone believing they are Holier than thou for I myself am a sinner and as such if judged by God would surely be sent the opposite direction of the Pearly Gates. In ones enthusiasm for everyone to come back home to Christ’s Church, greater fullfillment, and our love for our fellow man in wanting the best for him or her which is what we believe is the greatest chance to reach those Pearly Gates we Catholics do evangelize which I think takes many non-Catholics by surprise.
 
nilofc;:
Two types of Catholic Dissenters.:
There is a third type. The group that thinks that the Catholic Church is in heresy, because it has adopted theological positions that have been declared to be heretical by either a previous Pope, or General Council.

xan

jonathon
 
Jblake

That is where you are wrong and cannot state that with facts where the Roman Catholic Church has stated that a previous General Council or Pope has stated a previous theological principal is heresay.
They may have changed the Principal through growth and knowledge but not condemned as heresay
 
CalmDownWisWins,

For the headhunters – were these headhunters who had been “converted” and believed in some version of our God, or ones who believed in their pagan god and were on fire for it?
I have yet to see a Christian denomination that accepts human sacrifice as pleasing to God.

I don’t see how all the “fire” is coming from the Church. Rather, I see it as coming from the Holy Spirit, which is above and beyond the Church. I do not think I understand the idea of the Church as Jesus’ Body. It seems to me that this could make the Church divine in some way, which I do not think it is.

Proof of purgatory would be an explanation of how it is necessary. I’ve seen Scripture references, the idea that we pray for the dead as support, etc. What I do not understand is what I see as the concept of Jesus having paid for all our sins, yet us still having to pay for them.

That view of grace is one which I still do not understand. The way I see that view is, we do something, we get grace. For instance, I have heard from some of my Catholic friends that if you attend so many First Fridays in a row, you are granted an indulgence. I don’t understand how the Church can do that. I see grace more as God’s gift to give when He pleases, and that no human being can regulate it. I’m not trying to say my view is necessarily right – rather, I am trying to fully understand yours.

I also don’t see how priests are necessary for the Real Presence to be there. God can make the Real Presence be there whether or not someone speaks the words, and He is the one who works the miracle regardless. He is not dependent on rituals. That is not to say that the rituals are invalid, just that He can and probably does work outside them.
 
Hannah

First since Adam and Eve were chased out of Paradise how did man till Christ the Perfect sacraficial Lamb give thanks and Glory to God?

Answer why did Cain Kill Abel because Abels sacrafice before God was accepted before God and Cains was not.

What was Cains offering?

What was Abels?

What was Abraham asked to sacrafice to God?
Was it not Abrahams only son at the time.

God did stop him though.

However sounds like God was telling Abraham in His way of God sacraficing His only Son many thousands of years later and the promise of true salvation and tested Abraham (Man) as to his worthness of His Goodness.

Purgatory- Well lets look at it this way.

If you die with sin on your soul I am sure you agree that nothing can enter into the Kingdom of God that is not perfect.

That we die and our souls have been corrupted through our Human failures and wanton disobedience to God.(Sin)

That our souls (Robes) must be purged white.

That Jesus did take our past sins upon himself and did not go immediately to the Father till he descended into the dead and rose in a shimmering white robe(Soul). Why and why did he tell Mary not to touch him then till he sees the father. It was not because Mary Magdeline had couties but becuse he was now purified to go before the Father.

Transubstansiation to be done by priests and Bishops as Jesus gave that authority to this only to his Apostles and their successors at the Last Supper.
 
c659smith,

I think Abraham’s almost sacrifice of Isaac was both God’s way of testing Abraham’s faith (will you give Me everything?) and a “prediction” of Christ’s sacrifice. I know Abel’s offering was animals, while Cain’s was not, but I’m not sure whether Cain’s offering was rejected because it was not an animal or whether it was that he did not offer the firstfruits of his crop.

I thought Jesus descended to the dead so that He could go to those who were in Hell/Sheol and minister to them? That is an interesting way of looking at it though.
 
I have been a Christian all of my life, and ordained for over 1/2 of my life. If I were party to withholding the body and blood of Christ - the main instruments and means of God’s grace, and God’s self-giving - from another Christian, I would fear for my very soul.

There is no doubt that Christians are not in complete union with each other. But that impediment should not prevent us from sharing the very meal that Christ gave us to be in union with him. It is his body, and it is his blood. Even Peter and Judas were served with the full knowledge that Christ knew they would both deny and betray him. Judas failed. Peter was redeemed and became the first Pope. It wasn’t a perfect body of disciples, but they went on to perfection.

So shall we, with God’s help. I would rather err on the side of God being able to redeem anything - even an imperfect body.

O+
You have said that in a perfect world, the Catholic Church is the true Church.

I don’t understand how you can stay in your church if you believe that. Aren’t you afraid of damnation for not listening to the prompting of God’s grace, and joining the Catholic Church.

peace
 
By the grace of God I am squarely in the “culpably rejecting camp”. 👍
Since you don’t realize that there’s “only one ship”, you aren’t in the “culpably rejecting camp”, by definition.

You can WISH to be, out of ego-desire to be “the BAD boy”, but reality is not necessarily what you’d wish it to be.
 
CalmDownWisWins,

For the headhunters – were these headhunters who had been “converted” and believed in some version of our God, or ones who believed in their pagan god and were on fire for it?
I have yet to see a Christian denomination that accepts human sacrifice as pleasing to God.
The headhunters thought of themselves as “Christians”, because they call their god “Jesus” and like to “cross themselves” alot.

These “Christians”, who are certainly “Christian” by the “standards” of SOME supposedly Christian protestants, are certainly “on fire” for their god, and exhibit all the signs of the most FERVENT “evangelical Christian” group, mostly because they been very fortunate in being the BEST and most FRUITFULL headhunters in the region since they became “Christians”!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top