Is it time to close the Ark? (Depravity is why we can’t evangelize, so let’s focus on seekers with beauty, encounter and family)

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarysLurker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lion_IRC said:
Whose ‘ark’ is it that we should presume the right to decide to shut its doors?

Someone hasn’t read Genesis 7:16
Click to expand...
One of the worst things about web forums is no matter how well you try to explain your argument, it will be misunderstood and then “refuted” by people who never understood it to begin with.

I never said, shut the Ark to everyone. I said, shut the Ark and set sail on a rescue mission to those who will listen, such as seekers.
 
You don’t need to explain your argument. You need to read posts more carefully.

I never said, “shut the Ark to everyone” either.
 
Some of us (who have read Genesis 7:16) think that only the LORD can shut His ark and that you are in error to believe it’s somehow your prerogative to shut anyone out.
 
Lion_IRC said:
you are in error to believe it’s somehow your prerogative to shut anyone out.
Click to expand...
You continue to read something into the argument that isn’t there, because it makes you feel good to pretend that I’m condemning people to hell or something.

All I’m saying is, stop talking to people who won’t listen and stop diluting Catholicism for folks who won’t take it full strength.

You need to start learning how to attack arguments instead of the people making them.
MarysLurker said:
Protestantism has a very grim future ahead but no matter how much you try to convince one, you never can. They would rather say that Catholics are declining too and not consider the implications of not having Tradition or Magisterium to protect them from the rising tide of secularism.
Click to expand...
… and as you’re showing, I think the reason why you can’t see why the Ark has to be closed—the rain has started—is because you cannot separate ideas from people. People are not the problem, ideas are. Ideas that are hostile to both our churches. We have to mount our full defenses in order to survive the flood—we have to teach the full Truth that Christ entrusted to the Catholic Church. We are not selfish about this at all. No one is shutting the door on you. You are welcome to partake but you choose not to because you think you don’t need, say, Mary in order to protect your church from the tsunami of secularism. But that’s another topic.
 
Last edited:
So for whatever it is worth, I thought about you arguments a bit more. It is interesting. On one level you are right that immigrants and “traditional” families are a natural fit to be Catholics, and we are losing them. Sometimes they were Catholic, and they left. So the question becomes, why don’t you go after the “low hanging fruit” before trying to reach those who are going to be much tougher to convert. Those who who are tough to convert see families and immigrants who have fallen away from Catholicism, and they think to themselves “If these natural fits to the Catholic Church have some some problem being Catholic, how would I ever fit in?” So this part of your argument is in fact very good.

The problem is that in my life, I’m surrounded by non-religious or non-Catholic…people who are not “low hanging fruit”. That’s much of my day to day interactions, community, and profession. I really believe most of these people are searching for God, it is just that it will take a lot for them to see any value in Catholicism.

For me, the question becomes how do I witness Christ in my own community where I am now? It doesn’t really make sense to me to go to another setting because it will be easier to convert others.

This is where I struggle with your argument, even though I see some truth in it.
 
What part of “attack the idea, not the speaker” did you not understand?

If you’re just going to pick fights, I’m going to ignore you.
 
jack63 said:
The problem is that in my life, I’m surrounded by non-religious or non-Catholic…people who are not “low hanging fruit”. That’s much of my day to day interactions, community, and profession. I really believe most of these people are searching for God, it is just that it will take a lot for them to see any value in Catholicism.

For me, the question becomes how do I witness Christ in my own community where I am now? It doesn’t really make sense to me to go to another setting because it will be easier to convert others.
Click to expand...
I think you’re on to something. There are plenty of seekers among us. As Protestantism fades, there will be more seekers because with Protestantism’s fade so goes the anti-Catholic prejudices that it was born out of, at least to some extent.

I for one wish that Protestantism would not fade out. But as shown above I’ve concluded it’s futile to try to stop that collapse, sadly.
 
Last edited:
Beryllos said:
When does his mercy end?

Never.
Click to expand...
As long as a person is here on earth, he or she can be touched by the grace of God, truly repent for their sins, go to Confession and start anew.

At the moment of death, the time of mercy ends and the soul must face the Divine Justice of God.

Also, at the moment of death a person’s will is fixed and they are incapable of repentance, just like the angels (both good & bad). The good angels are incapable of disobeying God; the bad angels are incapable of repenting of their refusal to serve God.

If a person dies in the state of sanctifying grace, he or she will go to Heaven, either directly or via Purgatory if there is still temporal punishment due to their sins which have been forgiven.

If a person dies in the state of mortal sin, they will go to Hell forever. They will not repent just like the fallen angels.

This is why one should pray for all those who are in danger of dying in mortal sin as well as all the deceased. This is why the Church exhorts us to remain and grow in sanctifying grace, the Divine Life of God Himself. Most of all:

From a sudden and unprovided death, deliver us, O Lord!

Deacon/Priest: For a Christian, painless, blameless peaceful end to our life, and for a good account before the dread judgement-seat of Christ, let us beseech the Lord.

People: Grant it, O Lord.
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
Protestantism has a very grim future ahead but no matter how much you try to convince one, you never can. They would rather say that Catholics are declining too and not consider the implications of not having Tradition or Magisterium to protect them from the rising tide of secularism.
Click to expand...
In my own lifetime as a Catholic (40 years, since conversion as a twenty one year old), I’ve heard Protestants tell me of the impending collapse of the Catholic Church over:
  • 1980s. Lack of ecumenism and “progress”. The CC was antiquated and insular, while “The Spirit” was enlivening the rest of “the Church”. They spoke of “enlightened” Catholics who questioned church teaching in contrast with “bigoted” Catholics who still held, amazingly, to the old faith.
  • 1990s. Women’s ordination. Catholics were “voting with their feet”, allegedly, over the issue. (Just recently I’ve heard a “Catholic” man repeat that!).
  • 2000s. Clerical sexual abuse. Again, Catholics were “voting with their feet” and it would bring down the Church.
Yet in Australia the Catholic Church has steadily increased as a total proportion of Christians, while all the other movements have faded, to be replaced by the next. After starting a long way behind (in numbers, wealth and prestige), Catholics are now a majority of Australian Christians.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, a pm appeared here and I deleted it. 🙂
NateLue said:
Do these Anglicans now all themselves Catholic or Anglicans in communion with Rome?
Or do they consider them some sort of hyphenated Catholics?
Click to expand...
I’m a former Anglican and have had some contact with the Ordinariate, and I can say they definitely count themselves as fully Catholic in communion with Rome, but “Anglican” in the sense that they are preserving the English liturgical and cultural patrimony which predates the reformation, being mindful that Cranmer’s work marks a high point of English language.

They’d have to be serious about being “Catholic” because of the real effort and sacrifices involved in making the transition. This includes includes annulments to have marriages re-validated, an Affirmation of Faith, re-ordination for the priests, study of the Catholic faith, etc. Then there’s loss of old ties and communities, and possibly (I’m suspecting) old friendships. There’s also, in Australia at least, the swapping of a venerable national institution with its beautiful buildings and place in society (albeit fading), for one which is less reputable, even stigmatised, and starting again in tiny parishes with an uncertain future.
 
Last edited:
Edmundus1581
Thanks for your reply. Appreciate it. I have attended many Anglican use liturgies and really enjoy them because they take me back to when I was growing up in the Tridentine Mass days. I attend a parish where the priest demands lots of reverence during Mass and the use of the organ and many old time songs that I have heard used in the Ordinariate parishes with the use of only boys as Altar Servers. So I feel very comfortable.

I have seen one Ordinariate parish flourish from a few families to some 500-600 families. I wish the liturgies in all Catholic Churches followed the Tridentine Mass liturgy in the vernacular. Maybe some day that will happen.

God Bless
Nate
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top