M
MoreCoffee
Guest
I am probably repeating what others have said, I hope it will not irritate anybody if I do, but the pope’s ability to speak infallibly does not extend to everything he says. It encompasses only a very small subset of the things he says and writes and some popes never issue any infallible statements in their entire pontificate. A pope exercises the gift of infallibility only when he speaks for the whole church on matters of doctrine and morals. His infallible statements relate to proclaiming dogma or absolute moral strictures etc. Thus the last exercise of this gift in a matter of doctrine was the proclamation of the doctrine about the assumption of Mary in the 1950s.The Catholic Church has been a topic of fascination for me for some time now. I have studied their doctrines, and I have been interested in converting at various times (I was raised Southern Baptist, FYI), and keep coming back to that interest no matter how hard I try to push it away. I am fascinated by the tradition, the ritual, the crucifixes, the statues, the rosary, you name it. However, there are a few doctrines I am having trouble with.
I cannot and most likely will never accept papal infallibility (and yes, I know infallibility is not the same as impeccability). I would accept the pope as the leader of the Church, but would not blindly follow everything he says.
I see nothing wrong with birth control, as long as no abortion is involved. I am mostly against abortion, but believe it may be a necessary evil in a some cases (e.g. mother’s life in danger).
Unless you are a priest or a special Eucharistic minister you will not face the issue of giving the Eucharist to non-catholics and unless you become a bishop or pope you are very unlikely to face the issue of priestly marriage and the ordination of women so one hopes you will not be too troubled by what the hierarchy does with the authority that they’ve been given by the church.I believe the church should allow priests to marry, and ordain women as well. I also believe communion should be offered to all baptised Christians and not just Catholics.
In short, I am more likely to follow the dictates of my conscience than those of Rome, in the cases where they conflict. My beliefs would probably not be too dissimilar from those of Hans Kung. I apologize if this offends anyone, but I am trying to be honest.
From what I’ve read, I would fit right in with a sizable majority of American Catholics, but then again most of them grew up in it, as opposed to converting.
It would be remiss of me (or, in my opinion of any Catholic) to advise you to seek membership in a denomination or a group that is not in full communion with the Catholic Church. That being said, if (and when?) you seek RCIA enrolment be sure to discuss the issues on doctrine and morals that you have because the purpose of RCIA is to help with such issues as far as it is possible to help.I am not interested in debating or arguing with anyone regarding the topics I mentioned. What I want to know is this: Would you advise that I enroll in RCIA and seek conversion anyways? Or would you tell me to go find another church (perhaps Episcopalian)?
My advice is to always act according to conscience but to allow your conscience to be trained and shaped by God through the teaching of Christ in Christ’s church.Another way to phrase the question: Which would be the greater sin, to convert without total acceptance, or to never convert at all?
Thanks for any advice you can give!