Is the Catholic Church the right place?

[Suslar]

Is the Catholic Church the right place for someone who admits to being unfaithful in the practice? Or, to phrase it another way, what would the Church be like if “cafeteria Catholics” and the ChriEasters defected and only those who are orthodox remained? Would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

(*ChriEasters = those who only come to Mass on Christmas and Easter)

 

[Edward_H]

Is the Catholic Church the right place for someone who admits to being unfaithful in the practice? Or, to phrase it another way, what would the Church be like if “cafeteria Catholics” and the ChriEasters defected and only those who are orthodox remained? Would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

(*ChriEasters = those who only come to Mass on Christmas and Easter)

Good question.

Maybe, the best thing would be a world full of strugglers…each on the inclined plane of holiness, helping each other. Some have said we’re a hospital!

 

[JM3]

Matthew 13

24 Another parable he proposed to them, saying: The kingdom of heaven is likened to a man that sowed good seeds in his field.
25 But while men were asleep, his enemy came and oversowed cockle among the wheat and went his way.
26 And when the blade was sprung up, and had brought forth fruit, then appeared also the cockle.
27 And the servants of the goodman of the house coming said to him: Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? whence then hath it cockle?
28 And he said to them: An enemy hath done this. And the servants said to him: Wilt thou that we go and gather it up?
29 And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it.
30 Suffer both to grow until the harvest, and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers: Gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn, but the wheat gather ye into my barn.

 

[JackieMom]

Is the Catholic Church the right place for someone who admits to being unfaithful in the practice? Or, to phrase it another way, what would the Church be like if “cafeteria Catholics” and the ChriEasters defected and only those who are orthodox remained? Would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

(*ChriEasters = those who only come to Mass on Christmas and Easter)

We all fall short in practice… Are you talking about people who willfully disobey and have no desire to change that?

 

[JackieMom]

Matthew 13

24 Another parable he proposed to them, saying: The kingdom of heaven is likened to a man that sowed good seeds in his field.
25 But while men were asleep, his enemy came and oversowed cockle among the wheat and went his way.
26 And when the blade was sprung up, and had brought forth fruit, then appeared also the cockle.
27 And the servants of the goodman of the house coming said to him: Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? whence then hath it cockle?
28 And he said to them: An enemy hath done this. And the servants said to him: Wilt thou that we go and gather it up?
29 And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it.
30 Suffer both to grow until the harvest, and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers: Gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn, but the wheat gather ye into my barn.

So good.

 

[Suslar]

We all fall short in practice… Are you talking about people who willfully disobey and have no desire to change that?

well . . . we did encounter that on another thread recently . . . .
and the person wondered if the Church is the right place for them . . . .

 

[Mariem2]

It’s the right place for sinners to find their way back to God.

It’s not the right place for heretics.

 

[EasterJoy]

The OPs question includes at least two separate questions:

1. Should baptized Catholics stay even if they are bad Catholics? Well, yes, of course they should. They ought to try to be better, they should not sacrilegiously avail themselves of the Eucharist if they are unrepentant in mortal sin, but heaven forbid that they try to do that by going even farther away. They are still obliged to attend Mass and otherwise observe canon law, even if they cannot in good conscience go to Holy Communion. No, the phrase, “may as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb” does not apply here.
2. Should non-Catholics seek baptism even though they so lack faith in the Church that they don’t believe that what the Church teaches is meaningful or binding? That is a different question. To seek baptism when you don’t believe or don’t intend to reject sin pr accept the guidance the Church holds to be binding upon every Catholic is a sacrilege. That is not to say you ought not come to Mass and perhaps come around, that is not to say you cannot be baptized if your faith isn’t yet where you hope it will one day be, but baptism ought to wait until you can pronounce the vows of the Sacraments of Initiation in something approaching honesty.

I think other questions are implied here, as well:
3) Should observant Catholics encourage non-observant Catholics to defect? No, absolutely not! Observant Catholics should encourage non-observant Catholics to refrain from the Eucharist when they are in a state of mortal sin, but they should encourage non-observant Catholics to repent. This falls under “do unto others”, because of course every Catholic ought to be open to admonishment when they have fallen from grace or cooled in the ardor God deserves from them.

1. Should Catholics comfort themselves with the thought that they ought not leave the Church by totally refusing to acknowledge, let alone turn from, their serious breaches of moral law? Again: absolutely not! If a Catholic knows they have seriously violated the norms that the Church teaches are binding upon all Catholics, that Catholic ought to seek a repentant heart, not try to lull themselves into sleep about their condition. That is like having cancer and trying to lull oneself into thinking that if a doctor never diagnoses them and their symptoms aren’t debilitating, they don’t need any treatment yet.
2. Should bishops and priests “soften” their teaching of what is binding upon Catholics in order to keep defections to a minimum? Absolutely not! This would be like a doctor who tells his patients what they want to hear in order to keep his patients from seeking the care of quacks. The faithful have the right to the truth, and the fear that they won’t respond well to it is no reason to fail to give them the truth. That doesn’t mean that shepherds can tell the truth without also being kind and merciful, or that they can lead properly with no care about people’s feelings or without taking human nature into account at all, but only that the truth must be given first priority.

I think that Pope Benedict made comments in which his point was #5, but he was taken to mean that he’d like to just let the strays go their own way in order to make life easier for the righteous. He did not say that!! No, he meant that it was preferable to have some leave and need to be sought out than to have them leave in all reality except that their bodies and self-identity could still be found, self-deluded and spiritually dead, all still in their pews.

IOW, it is better to have a sheep wander or bolt away from the fold and have to go out and bring it back to health than to let it contentedly rot or starve in place because no one will go after it to treat its ills while the poor animal was still physically in the fold.

Does that help?

 

[Soren_Itenu]

It’s the right place for sinners to find their way back to God.

It’s not the right place for heretics.

This is correct.

If you are struggling to obey but not understanding – but are humble enough to listen to the Church’s authority – then stay.

If you are a heretic, then go. To call yourself a Catholic but refuse to follow the Church’s teachings on all – ALL – moral matters, then you are a terrible witness of Christianity to the world. Not because you’re a sinner, but because you are showing a false image of what Catholicism.

When people come to this forum and ask questions about, say, contraception, and then get answers from “Catholics” saying it’s ok. Everyone does it. That kind of answer is in direct violation of Church teaching and therefore heretical. The Church is for sinners, not for heretics.

*you is the general “you”, not the OP

 

[UUTDad]

This is correct.

If you are a heretic, then go. To call yourself a Catholic but refuse to follow the Church’s teachings on all – ALL – moral matters, then you are a terrible witness of Christianity to the world. Not because you’re a sinner, but because you are showing a false image of what Catholicism.

When people come to this forum and ask questions about, say, contraception, and then get answers from “Catholics” saying it’s ok. Everyone does it. That kind of answer is in direct violation of Church teaching and therefore heretical. The Church is for sinners, not for heretics.

I get your point, but you do realize, that if everyone who refused to follow ALL of the church’s teachings suddenly left, the pews would be almost empty.

The church has enough issues with declining attendance. This would be like the final nail in the coffin. Besides, the church wants money from all of the people, whether they follow ALL of the teachings or not.

 

[The_Bucket]

IOW, it is better to have a sheep wander or bolt away from the fold and have to go out and bring it back to health than to let it contentedly rot or starve in place because no one will go after it to treat its ills while the poor animal was still physically in the fold.

This, this, a thousand times this.

Revelation:

I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth. For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing; not knowing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked.

 

[Soren_Itenu]

UUTDad,

This shouldn’t be a numbers game. It should be about total obedience, not butts in the pews.

 

[Kelfa28]

UUTDad,

This shouldn’t be a numbers game. It should be about total obedience, not butts in the pews.

Exactly…the priests will still celebrate Mass in an empty Church every morning because that will never change.

Celebrating Mass won’t go away based on the number of people in each Church. It will be celebrated regardless if it’s a packed Church or a Priest all by himself in a shack somewhere.

 

[EasterJoy]

If you are a heretic, then go…

No. If you are a heretic, admit it, and repent. Don’t fiddle around with this “we reject our excommunication” nonsense. Don’t fool yourself with the “well, I believe most of it” delusion. If you don’t believe something, then stay, but don’t be content to remain in unbelief. Ask to be helped in your unbelief. Expect to be told to abandon your unbelief. Expect to be confronted with your choices.

This is the problem–that is, the people who think they ought to be entitled to remain in open unbelief without any admonishment. Those who are disobedient or defiant ought to expect correction. They should not expect to be thanked for their physical presence.

 

[EasterJoy]

I get your point, but you do realize, that if everyone who refused to follow ALL of the church’s teachings suddenly left, the pews would be almost empty.

The church has enough issues with declining attendance. This would be like the final nail in the coffin. Besides, the church wants money from all of the people, whether they follow ALL of the teachings or not.

People leave churches because the churches believe nothing and stand for nothing, too, because the rituals have become empty and the theology bankrupt. The churches in the US that have gradually abandoned all their authoritative teachings are dying. What is the point of giving your money to a mere organization, and one that stands for nothing, at that?

The Church does not expect everyone to act perfectly. If our leaders expected that, then how is it that the priests and bishops and even the Pope all have confessors? The Church only says that we are bound to examine ourselves regularly and repent when we are wrong.

When doctors find that patients want to be told what they want to hear instead of what will actually heal them, the doctors do not lose their responsibility to practice real medicine. A doctor who has to become a quack in order to make a living needs to find a new line of work to feed himself, so that he can practice medicine where he can. So it may become with the Church–it is better than the alternative! If the Church is all but wiped out or forsaken because she kept teaching the truth, if her priests have to work as Paul did because the faithful who remain are so few that they can’t support the clergy, well, at least her remnant will be able to stand before God without condemnation, because the Church will not have abdicated her duty.

 

[russet1]

On the other thread the person in question denies the Church’s teaching on Birth control, has no intention of changing her view and when confronted with the teaching stated that if the church is so judgy then perhaps she should not be Catholic. So, I think the real question is.
Is the Church the right place for someone who does not believe in the Church and does not want to conform?

Of course any dissenter or sinner can be Catholic but to be a PRACTICING Catholic they need to use the sacrament of confession and be obedient to the Church and to God.

It is the age old question of can one be
Pro Bith Control
Pro gay marriage
Pro abortion
etc
and consider themselves Catholic.

An Orthodox Jew cannot dine on bacon every day.

You either are Catholic in belief or not.

 

[Suslar]

This is the problem–that is, the people who think they ought to be entitled to remain in open unbelief without any admonishment. Those who are disobedient or defiant ought to expect correction. They should not expect to be thanked for their physical presence.

Lots of great points on this thread.
I particularly like this one, Joy. There IS an entitlement thing going on for some people and they certainly don’t want to be told they are wrong or not in full Communion with Catholic core belief. And the response back when confronted is, “Well maybe I should find another church.”

Is there more damage being done when such people remain - obstinate, vocal, demanding “rights” and misguiding others? . . . possibly even misleading their own children into believing membership in the Body of Christ is something different than what it really is?

Looking forward to reading thoughtful replies . . . . .

 

[EasterJoy]

Lots of great points on this thread.
I particularly like this one, Joy. There IS an entitlement thing going on for some people and they certainly don’t want to be told they are wrong or not in full Communion with Catholic core belief. And the response back when confronted is, “Well maybe I should find another church.”

Is there more damage being done when such people remain - obstinate, vocal, demanding “rights” and misguiding others? . . . possibly even misleading their own children into believing membership in the Body of Christ is something different than what it really is?

Looking forward to reading thoughtful replies . . . . .

It is not our call to decide if others among the baptized are “worth the damage.” They belong to the Lord, the Lord thirsts for their souls as much as for ours, and we are duty-bound to be as thirsty for them as He is. We are bound to be open to correction ourselves, too, and we are bound to be as patient as we can with those who are only struggling as we all do. The normal way for a person to reach salvation is through life in the Church and the grace of her sacraments. We can never remain silent while anyone teaches otherwise.

So if they say, “Well, maybe I ought to find another church”, the answer needs to be “You can’t run from the truth. You can’t change the width of the narrow gate by backing away from it. Don’t leave! Repent! Learn more, to help you believe! Look for support! We all have to do that. But don’t leave. God can save anyone, anywhere, but this is the normal way provided for the salvation of souls. Don’t presume you can do without it. That is not what you will find in the plain meaning of the Scriptures.” Besides, the question isn’t anything new:

*Therefore, since Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same attitude (for whoever suffers in the flesh has broken with sin), so as not to spend what remains of one’s life in the flesh on human desires, but on the will of God. For the time that has passed is sufficient for doing what the Gentiles like to do: living in debauchery, evil desires, drunkenness, orgies, carousing, and wanton idolatry. They are surprised that you do not plunge into the same swamp of profligacy, and they vilify you; but they will give an account to him who stands ready to judge the living and the dead. For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead that, though condemned in the flesh in human estimation, they might live in the spirit in the estimation of God.

The end of all things is at hand. Therefore, be serious and sober for prayers. Above all, let your love for one another be intense, because love covers a multitude of sins. Be hospitable to one another without complaining. As each one has received a gift, use it to serve one another as good stewards of God’s varied grace. Whoever preaches, let it be with the words of God; whoever serves, let it be with the strength that God supplies, so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.*
*Beloved, do not be surprised that a trial by fire is occurring among you, as if something strange were happening to you. But rejoice to the extent that you share in the sufferings of Christ, so that when his glory is revealed you may also rejoice exultantly. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let no one among you be made to suffer as a murderer, a thief, an evildoer, or as an intriguer. But whoever is made to suffer as a Christian should not be ashamed but glorify God because of the name. For it is time for the judgment to begin with the household of God; if it begins with us, how will it end for those who fail to obey the gospel of God? “And if the righteous one is barely saved, where will the godless and the sinner appear?” As a result, those who suffer in accord with God’s will hand their souls over to a faithful creator as they do good. *1 Peter 4:1-19

 

[IA_Catholic]

Great question

First posting so take it easy on me…

Church teachings are not open for debate. Take it upon yourself to water them down and you have stepped away from the inspired word of God. (Game over)

Having said that, I don’t believe it is correct to exclude anyone. I was a cafeteria catholic for a very long time until some things God put into my life caused me to start learning more about my religion.

You have to have faith that God has them there on Easter & Christmas for a reason.

 

[october_baby]

I think that if our priest’s started preaching orthodoxy (IE, the real presence,birth control,
Hell,homosexuailty,abortion, and other orthodox subjects.) the pews would be a
more empty. As St. Paul said" in the last days people will look for doctrine that will
tickle the ears.