I've tried, but didn't feel right

[masuwerte]

 God bless people of every creed, color, culture and country. We all 'see through a glass darkly" and I don't have a problem waiting until we get to know the truth in the world to come. My guess is that we all are far removed from the truth since our finite minds aren't able to comprehend it. I have trouble understanding what may be a million solar systems out there somewhere, so I've given up on the idea that theologians can understand all that either. My faith is in God, and not in creeds.

Well said, Roy. IMHO.

 

[kathmandu]

I have a hard time at a Roman Catholic Mass because of the music. The Cantor up front is very distracting, and when the Psalm is sung I can’t understand the words.

I miss the days of the music coming from the loft in the back of the church. I would probably be more comfortable if the music was in the back where it used to be. And the old hymns were used.

 

[guanophore]

Okay. Let me be the bad guy. I have trouble feeling at home in the Catholic Church.

Why? Over the years I have done a lot of reading and thinking, and increasingly I have needed the freedom to question, to explore, to be less dogmatic than Catholicism requires. Take transubstantiation. Maybe, but sometimes it can seem superstitious to me, especially Eucharistic Adoration, appearing to worship the body and blood of Jesus, not sure I accept it as such.

You might have sensibilities more inclined to an Eastern Catholic understanding?

Or, Mary. Obviously an esteemed woman. But the teachings that she never committed a sin (was she human or not?),

Of course! Otherwise, Jesus would not be fully human, as He took His flesh from hers.
Human beings were not created in sin, or for sin. The reason Mary is held in such high esteem is because she is our model of the new Eve - what humanity is created to be. We are to walk in communion with our Creator without sin.

that she was the only person ever born without original sin (a concept that troubles me, like inherited sin?), that she was translated body and soul into heaven (do bodies exist in heaven?) - etc.

Actually, it is also taught that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit when He met Jesus (still in the womb), and thus, was born without original sin. But, you might also be inclined to a more Eastern concept of original sin.

We an see from the Gospels that Jesus had a physical body after his resurrection, and that He took this flesh (transfigured) into heaven. If there was something inherintly wrong with human flesh, He would not have glorified His, and taken it with Him into heaven. So, obviously, bodies do exist in heaven, but they are transformed bodies.

1 Cor 15:51-55

51 Lo! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53 For this perishable nature must put on the imperishable, and this mortal nature must put on immortality. 54 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
55 “O death, where is thy victory?
O death, where is thy sting?”

 In other words, I have become uncomfortable attending Mass when it seems to require that I accept all the doctrines that go along with it.

Have you ever attended a Divine Liturgy at an Eastern Catholic Church?

And the practices, too, like the forbidding of unapproved birth control, which seems to me to be simply another step in medical progress, and certainly not to be compared for a split second to abortion. That and approved birth control have the same objective anyway - family planning, which can be a reasonable goal.

Most artificial birth control is abortifacient, which is why it is forbidden. Since we believe that life begins at conception, the taking of that life is considered murder.

God bless people of every creed, color, culture and country. We all 'see through a glass darkly" and I don't have a problem waiting until we get to know the truth in the world to come. My guess is that we all are far removed from the truth since our finite minds aren't able to comprehend it. I have trouble understanding what may be a million solar systems out there somewhere, so I've given up on the idea that theologians can understand all that either. My faith is in God, and not in creeds.

I hear this frequently from people who reject one or more doctrines of the faith. They don’t want to accept that God has revealed to His Church all that we need to know in this life. It is easier to pretend that “we won’t know till we get there” than it is to obey what has been revealed.

 

[Bilbo_Baggins_1]

I hear this frequently from people who reject one or more doctrines of the faith. They don’t want to accept that God has revealed to His Church all that we need to know in this life. It is easier to pretend that “we won’t know till we get there” than it is to obey what has been revealed.

The one thing that springs to my mind as I read this, and forgive me if I’m misdirecting your quote, is if God has revealed to His Church all that we need to know in this life (and I do believe that is true), is the same true for the Church of a little over 300 years prior to the 1854 introduction (probably not the best word) of dogma by which all of the faithful are bound and must follow in their beliefs? If not, which I personally do not think is the case, why were the faithful of the 16th century and before not able to say that God had revealed all that they needed to know in their lives?

 

[guanophore]

The one thing that springs to my mind as I read this, and forgive me if I’m misdirecting your quote, is if God has revealed to His Church all that we need to know in this life (and I do believe that is true), is the same true for the Church of a little over 300 years prior to the 1854 introduction (probably not the best word) of dogma by which all of the faithful are bound and must follow in their beliefs? If not, which I personally do not think is the case, why were the faithful of the 16th century and before not able to say that God had revealed all that they needed to know in their lives?

The declaration of a dogma only occurs in the case of rampant heresy. In 1854 the heresy of Sola Scriptura had begun to degrade the faith so that essential elements were being rejected. The same thing happened in the fourth century with regard to the doctrine of the Trinity. the Church found it necessary to declare and define the Trinity so that the faithful would be proteced against heresy. This does not mean no one believed in the Trinity prior to that time, or that it was not held as an infallible doctrine of the faith.

Another example is the closing of the canon in 382. The faithful recognized the Scriptures as such as soon as they were written, and they were used in the Mass. But, since there were 400+ books at the time all claiming to be God inspired,the Church had to protect the once for all deposit of faith.

 

[Godith]

Hi Godith,

Bless you! That is wonderful. Please update us on how you felt at the Mass.

I have started a thread here about how I found it. I had a good experience, and felt that I met with God.

 

[Roy5]

guanaophone

Three responses.

** 1. Hm! It hasn’t been my understanding that most artificial birth control methods involve abortifacient? **Does that mean the Church is okay with those that are not - like condoms? Of course, not. If it were to condemn those that led to abortion in some fashion I would understand and sympathize more with its position. but I find that church policy goes well beyond that. I believe it is the right of parents to limit their families to the number that they can take good care of. As mentioned, the ‘approved’ birth control method approved by the Church has the same goal - avoid pregnancy. Under certain conditions this strikes me as a choice best left up to parents and not to any Church or any state…

** 2. “Obey what is revealed”. Revealed to whom? **I mean, are truths revealed in verses like Ex, 22:18 and 20? And what about the horror story in II Kings 2:23ff? Did God reveal to the Pope that Galileo was wrong? That Hus should be burned at the stake? That the Huguenots should be murdered during the Massacre of St. Bartholomew? And we could continue on this track for a long time. I just finished a book entitled Absolute Monarchs, a history of the Popes. Quite a checkered saga. Then, again, other Christians have little to boast about, too. There’splenty of blame and shame to go around.

**3. The fact that Christ came back in the flesh doesn't convince me that we are going to live in flesh bodies in the world to come.** The scriptures certainly aren't clear, but Jesus did discuss how there wouldn't be marriage etc as here on earth. Personally, I doubt if it is a physical world similar to this one. Besides, there isn't a hint in the Bible that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven. In fact, in all those New Testament epistles, written to the early churches, there isn't a single mention of Mary. Makes me wonder if veneration of Mary didn't escalate over the early centuries, when there were virgin goddesses in a variety of competing religions. But all Christian certainly honor Mary as the earthly mother of Jesus.

God bless everybody - no exceptions.

 God bless everybody.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

Ave Maria

My faith is in God, and not in creeds.

You realize what you have stated, is a creed?

Besides, there isn’t a hint in the Bible that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven. In fact, in all those New Testament epistles, written to the early churches, there isn’t a single mention of Mary.

So who’s the woman in Rev 12:1 seen by St. John in heaven? And why is this hard to accept when Enoch, Elijah and Moses were bodily assumed into heaven?