Man Made Rules?

[stewstew03]

i really dislike all of the finger pointing back and forth between the Catholic church and the protestant churches. the protestant churches are still helping people be good Christian people and to lead Christian lives and to serve God and their community. i believe that there are many good Christian people who are not Catholic. i know many will disagree, but the Catholic Church have their rules and the protestant churches have their own rules,
but, as long we are worshiping the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we re all one Christian community.

Iron sharpens iron. Most of the discussions in the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum involve challenging one another’s beliefs and debunking myths/misunderstandings (on both sides).

 

[stevekehl]

The Protestant churches that I’m familiar with in my area require their congregants to attend a class before becoming a member of the church. In principle, I don’t see how this requirement is any different than penitential observances such as fasting, the example given by your friend.

In any event, fasting (in the US) is not “required” except for two days of the year: Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. But, this is no different than the Southern Baptist’s obligation to abstain from alcohol (and the SBC has even passed resolutions on fasting).

Non-denominational churches like Lakewood Church (here in Houston) “require” their members to give 10%. To be sure, Pastor Osteen doesn’t have any way to enforce this rule, except to suggest the following:

“…to be successful in your walk with God, commit to honor God with your finances. When you commit to give the Lord the first 10% of your income, God promises He will pour out blessings you cannot contain. Tithing is the first key to financial prosperity.”

In other words, a Lakewood Church-goer who does not tithe will not be successful in her walk with God, and she will miss out on financial prosperity. Sounds like a rule to me!

Please don’t confuse motivational speakers like Osteen with Protestants. The “health and wealth” Gospel treats faith like currency used to purchase worldly prosperity and prestige from God. As to the original question, there are several church teachings that don’t have a basis in Scripture. Such as transubstantiation, how bread can stay bread in its accidentals yet change in substance makes no sense to me. I know God can act any way He chooses, but based on Scripture I don’t see how this teaching came about. Likewise with infant baptism, penance, purgatory, the pope being infallible, only priests can touch communion,and praying to saints and the Virgin Mary. These being said, I wouldn’t refuse to worship in a Catholic church, its just that the Catholics I know don’t go to church. Let the responses begin.

 

[Nicea325]

Please don’t confuse motivational speakers like Osteen with Protestants. The “health and wealth” Gospel treats faith like currency used to purchase worldly prosperity and prestige from God. As to the original question, there are several church teachings that don’t have a basis in Scripture. Such as transubstantiation, how bread can stay bread in its accidentals yet change in substance makes no sense to me. I know God can act any way He chooses, but based on Scripture I don’t see how this teaching came about. Likewise with infant baptism, penance, purgatory, the pope being infallible, only priests can touch communion,and praying to saints and the Virgin Mary. These being said, I wouldn’t refuse to worship in a Catholic church, its just that the Catholics I know don’t go to church. Let the responses begin.

First show us where everything has to be explicitly stated in scripture to be valid? Care to show me where the canon of OT & NT has its basis in the Bible? Where is the basis for anyone to start their own church,if they do not agree?

 

[stewstew03]

Please don’t confuse motivational speakers like Osteen with Protestants. The “health and wealth” Gospel treats faith like currency used to purchase worldly prosperity and prestige from God. As to the original question, there are several church teachings that don’t have a basis in Scripture. Such as transubstantiation, how bread can stay bread in its accidentals yet change in substance makes no sense to me. I know God can act any way He chooses, but based on Scripture I don’t see how this teaching came about. Likewise with infant baptism, penance, purgatory, the pope being infallible, only priests can touch communion,and praying to saints and the Virgin Mary. These being said, I wouldn’t refuse to worship in a Catholic church, its just that the Catholics I know don’t go to church. Let the responses begin.

Assuming you own a bible, I guess you don’t believe the words printed in that book are Holy?

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Please don’t confuse motivational speakers like Osteen with Protestants. The “health and wealth” Gospel treats faith like currency used to purchase worldly prosperity and prestige from God. As to the original question, there are several church teachings that don’t have a basis in Scripture. Such as transubstantiation, how bread can stay bread in its accidentals yet change in substance makes no sense to me. I know God can act any way He chooses, but based on Scripture I don’t see how this teaching came about. Likewise with infant baptism, penance, purgatory, the pope being infallible, only priests can touch communion,and praying to saints and the Virgin Mary. These being said, I wouldn’t refuse to worship in a Catholic church, its just that the Catholics I know don’t go to church. Let the responses begin.

Hello brother.
I too, grew up in Evangelicalism, so I know how you feel with regards to people like Olsteen being mixed up with those who are pious, devout, and sensible.

But yet I disagree with regards to the teaching that are “unscriptural.”

If you read John 6 in its entirety, it sounds to me that Jesus is specifically talking about his body, not some symbolic communion. Why did so many disciples leave? Because they were disgusted with the concept of “eating flesh and blood.” Yet Jesus did not chase after them, correcting their “mistake.” Nor did John attempt to clarify. And this is interesting primarily because the Gospels in the past, (including John’s) have clarified teachings of Jesus that seemed confusing or impossible. Why not be consistent and do it here as well?

Because Jesus actually meant his body really was in Communion.

I think part of the problem that many Christians have with regards to Catholic teaching is that they see the Bible coming before the Tradition. This is incorrect. The faith was already clearly established before there was ever a Bible to speak of. Christians practiced the faith and passed it down by word of mouth - Oral Tradition, which was also essential to the preservation of the Jewish faith that preceded it.

The Bible is the product of this Tradition. It is not the cause of this Tradition. By the traditions that Church was passed down by the earliest Christians, the Bible was compiled. And that is the critical point here.

 

[Nicea325]

Hello brother.
I too, grew up in Evangelicalism, so I know how you feel with regards to people like Olsteen being mixed up with those who are pious, devout, and sensible.

But yet I disagree with regards to the teaching that are “unscriptural.”

If you read John 6 in its entirety, it sounds to me that Jesus is specifically talking about his body, not some symbolic communion. Why did so many disciples leave? Because they were disgusted with the concept of “eating flesh and blood.” Yet Jesus did not chase after them, correcting their “mistake.” Nor did John attempt to clarify. And this is interesting primarily because the Gospels in the past, (including John’s) have clarified teachings of Jesus that seemed confusing or impossible. Why not be consistent and do it here as well?

Because Jesus actually meant his body really was in Communion.

I think part of the problem that many Christians have with regards to Catholic teaching is that they see the Bible coming before the Tradition. This is incorrect. The faith was already clearly established before there was ever a Bible to speak of. Christians practiced the faith and passed it down by word of mouth - Oral Tradition, which was also essential to the preservation of the Jewish faith that preceded it.

The Bible is the product of this Tradition. It is not the cause of this Tradition. By the traditions that Church was passed down by the earliest Christians, the Bible was compiled. And that is the critical point here.

More critical is the fact many Bible-only folks overlook is the scriptural fact Jesus founded His church,not the Bible. Christianity is not a religion of the book,but of the person: Christ.

 

[MartinJordan]

All scripture is useful. The word “Useful” is clearly not an end all be all word is it?

Besides all scripture that is reflected in 2 Timothy 3:16 didnt include what we have today in the NT then. Lets be fair here.

MJ

 

[peace2u2]

I’m so obstinate and stubborn I would probably argue with a burning bush…

Funny! I’m sure we all have or have had those same characteristics. . . Thank God for His grace that He works in us to transform us to be more like His Son, Jesus!

“The hardness of God is kinder than the softness of men, and His compulsion is our liberation.” ~ C.S. Lewis

 

[peace2u2]

in our Catholic parish, we have many collections other than our weekly tithe. we have the building church fund, CRS, for building a well in nigeria, Peter’s Pence, St. Vincent de Paul, and many others. since i have become Catholic, weekly i receive requests for donations from numerous charities that i had never heard of until i became Catholic. in the Catholic church, we usually don’t have homilies about tithing like they might do in the protestant churches. my daughter-in-law stopped going to her protestant church because week after week the sermons were on the importance of tithing. she felt like they were speaking directly to her. my problem right now is that i am experiencing financial difficulties and i would love to donate to the church and certain charities, but can’t until i begin working again.

Our Pastors in the Catholic Church do not give a speech week after week, all year long about giving or giving more to a cause. But, we do have our Annual Stewardship Appeal going on now.

Its actually nice because each week during Lent we have a new speaker who comes and tells us about who they are and the organization that they work for. Last week, we had a speaker from Catholic Charities who told us about what they have been doing with our donations. Its nice to hear how we have helped those who needed help and Catholic Charities doesn’t ask you if your Catholic. . . they help you period.

 

[peace2u2]

i really dislike all of the finger pointing back and forth between the Catholic church and the protestant churches. the protestant churches are still helping people be good Christian people and to lead Christian lives and to serve God and their community. i believe that there are many good Christian people who are not Catholic. i know many will disagree, but the Catholic Church have their rules and the protestant churches have their own rules,
but, as long we are worshiping the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we re all one Christian community.

I don’t think were finger pointing. Its called, were having a theological discussion on our differences. And no one here is saying that our Protestant brothers and sisters are not good Christians. They are good Christians. We love our brothers and sisters in Christ.
We just want them to come to know the fullness of God’s love in the Catholic Church.

Is not the Catholic Mass the highest form of worship of God? I guess if I compared it to the Sunday Worship Service at my local Non-Denominational Church, yes, the form of worship at the Catholic Church takes on a higher level of reverence and praise to God. Well, I guess if you understand each part of the Catholic Mass and why we do what we do, then yes it could be understood. And, I’m sure there are some Catholics at Mass on Sunday who do not understand what is going on due to lack of teaching on part not just to what they were taught in CCD class but what their parents didn’t teach them as well.

"Practice the little virtues which pertain to your littleness - patience, tolerance with your neighbor, humility, sweetness, affability, bearing your imperfections and many others. ~St. Pio of Pietrelcina.

 

[peace2u2]

Iron sharpens iron. Most of the discussions in the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum involve challenging one another’s beliefs and debunking myths/misunderstandings (on both sides).

Agreed

 

[peace2u2]

Please don’t confuse motivational speakers like Osteen with Protestants. The “health and wealth” Gospel treats faith like currency used to purchase worldly prosperity and prestige from God. As to the original question, there are several church teachings that don’t have a basis in Scripture. Such as transubstantiation, how bread can stay bread in its accidentals yet change in substance makes no sense to me. I know God can act any way He chooses, but based on Scripture I don’t see how this teaching came about. Likewise with infant baptism, penance, purgatory, the pope being infallible, only priests can touch communion,and praying to saints and the Virgin Mary. These being said, I wouldn’t refuse to worship in a Catholic church, its just that the Catholics I know don’t go to church. Let the responses begin.

Thanks for your insight. I hope the following links help you understand the things you mention that you think don’t have a basis in Scripture:

therealpresence.org/eucharst/scrip/a6.html

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/euchb2a.htm

It sounds like the Catholics you know have fallen asleep in the light of waiting for His return. And if you think the Catholic Church is empty on Sunday or during the week during daily Mass, then perhaps you need to come and take a look. Its true that some Parishes are more vibrant than others and perhaps a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit is needed to breath new life back into some parishoners. But,

Interestingly, my Non-Denominational cousin who left the Catholic Church loves his newfound Church because he tells me its great that he doesn’t have to go to church every Sunday and that he can go to church whenever he feels like it and not feel guilty about it. He can worship God however he pleases. Sounds like God on his own terms. Or in other words, he has not completely surrendered to God’s will because God does command us does He not to worship Him on Sunday in a community sense in Church?

 

[Diana_Catherine]

More critical is the fact many Bible-only folks overlook is the scriptural fact Jesus founded His church,not the Bible. Christianity is not a religion of the book,but of the person: Christ.

That’s a very good point. He didn’t say I will be My Bible or my Books for you all but He said I will build my Church. Not that we don’t need Scripture, because we do, it is part of the Church He built. It just can’t stand alone.

 

[Diana_Catherine]

I wouldn’t refuse to worship in a Catholic church, its just that the Catholics I know don’t go to church. Let the responses begin.

There are, I know many Catholics who don’t attend Mass, but that can be said about any denomination. There are many people that don’t attend Church, some from every denomination but there are still a lot of Catholics who do attend Mass every Sunday and are very devout Christians.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I don’t think were finger pointing. Its called, were having a theological discussion on our differences. And no one here is saying that our Protestant brothers and sisters are not good Christians. They are good Christians. We love our brothers and sisters in Christ.
We just want them to come to know the fullness of God’s love in the Catholic Church.

Is not the Catholic Mass the highest form of worship of God? I guess if I compared it to the Sunday Worship Service at my local Non-Denominational Church, yes, the form of worship at the Catholic Church takes on a higher level of reverence and praise to God. Well, I guess if you understand each part of the Catholic Mass and why we do what we do, then yes it could be understood. And, I’m sure there are some Catholics at Mass on Sunday who do not understand what is going on due to lack of teaching on part not just to what they were taught in CCD class but what their parents didn’t teach them as well.

"Practice the little virtues which pertain to your littleness - patience, tolerance with your neighbor, humility, sweetness, affability, bearing your imperfections and many others. ~St. Pio of Pietrelcina.

pehaps on this thread, not so much finger pointing. i love the Catholic Mass and i love being Catholic, don’t misunderstand me. on so many other threads in the non-catholic religions, there is so much arguing and we need to remember that even though we don’t worship under one church, we all are brothers and sisters in Christ. it would be wonderful if we were one faith, one church. perhaps, someday, differences will be put aside and we will be. discussion is good. however, when it comes to tithing, churches have bills to pay too and salaries to pay and in the protestant churches they support many ministries that they donate to that help in spreading the Gospel or providing food and clothing to the poor.
many people don’t realize that part of being a Christian is not just showing up to church on Sunday, but being involved and doing acts of charity. times are hard right now and people aren’t able to give because they are struggling to pay their own bills and provide for their families. i recently read an article about the high number of church foreclosures.

 

[CopticChristian]

This question is for those who have left the Catholic Church for another Christian Church and for those who are non-Catholic Christians who refuse to worship God in the Catholic Church.

I would like to know why you left the Catholic Church for another church or why you refuse to worship God in the Catholic Church?

A friend of mine has left her Catholic Church for a non-denominational church stating that she left because the Catholic Church has too many man made rules. But, when asked to give more detail she just really couldn’t give me any other examples except for the fasting rules during Lent and that the amount of money we give to the church is between us and God and that there is no need to use envelopes for the collections. ?

Then you may ask your friend why she goes to a “man made” church?

 

[Micorhizea]

This question is for those who have left the Catholic Church for another Christian Church and for those who are non-Catholic Christians who refuse to worship God in the Catholic Church.

I would like to know why you left the Catholic Church for another church or why you refuse to worship God in the Catholic Church?

A friend of mine has left her Catholic Church for a non-denominational church stating that she left because the Catholic Church has too many man made rules. But, when asked to give more detail she just really couldn’t give me any other examples except for the fasting rules during Lent and that the amount of money we give to the church is between us and God and that there is no need to use envelopes for the collections. ?

Though I’m technically a Catholic, there were very serious questions for me during a period of my life and they are only now beginning to be resolved. And quite frankly, I wouldn’t and still don’t discuss the reasons why all this happened. That reticence is because I quickly discovered that few, actually no, people in the Church had any clue as to what I was talking about as far as my interior experience. Now I know better, but the people or Saints who clearly have a handle on what my concerns were. But even they were or are being given difficulties by the Church despite some of them now being Doctors of the Church. So in some instances there is something broken in the chain of information, largely I believe, because it is all about learned belief, and not so much genuine contemplative, mystical or graced experience,

It was very disconcerting to me that Catholicism din’t address my real concerns, or at least that the ideas necessary for my progress were so remote and restricted, that it turned out that it was thorough non=catholic means that my questions were addressed. It is for this reason that I have been pretty adamant that while the Church may serve very well as a religious format for many, and more than that for some, it does not immediately and publicly address certain phases of the spiritual maturation phenomena that one might experience. This can be seen in its history of how it dealt with certain individuals who became saints. And it is my opinion that, since I have met a number of folks with nearly an identical version of my problem, the Church is chasing away numerous individuals who could in fact become its strongest pillars.

So what I might add is that due to a number of considerations that I will not go into here, it appears that there is what one might call a “basic operating system” of the human, whom we can acknowledge is “made in the image and likeness of God.” Now God, personally, is not a Roman Catholic, else we would not recognize the different rites of the Church, nor would we conduct ecumenical or missionary activities. The assumption is that there is a basic pattern that renders everyone, regardless or status, salvable. Only we tend, since we are Catholic, and feel through dogma and tradition, that ours is the single-most way of attaining heaven.

That is well and good, and the Church in its awesome intellectual capacity has reasoned why this can appear to be so. And yet there is, experientially, a distinction between theory and practice. So my “way” has been to explore the underlying structure of human composition over which which Catholicism, or any faith, can be superimposed and felt to be actually a paradigm that corresponds to reality.

But as I said, for the vast majority of folks, faith as it is presented by the public and institutional Church is very adequate and very useful. It just didn’t go far enough for me in my hour of need.

 

[Nicea325]

Though I’m technically a Catholic, there were very serious questions for me during a period of my life and they are only now beginning to be resolved. And quite frankly, I wouldn’t and still don’t discuss the reasons why all this happened. That reticence is because I quickly discovered that few, actually no, people in the Church had any clue as to what I was talking about as far as my interior experience. Now I know better, but the people or Saints who clearly have a handle on what my concerns were. But even they were or are being given difficulties by the Church despite some of them now being Doctors of the Church. So in some instances there is something broken in the chain of information, largely I believe, because it is all about learned belief, and not so much genuine contemplative, mystical or graced experience,

It was very disconcerting to me that Catholicism din’t address my real concerns, or at least that the ideas necessary for my progress were so remote and restricted, that it turned out that it was thorough non=catholic means that my questions were addressed. It is for this reason that I have been pretty adamant that while the Church may serve very well as a religious format for many, and more than that for some, it does not immediately and publicly address certain phases of the spiritual maturation phenomena that one might experience. This can be seen in its history of how it dealt with certain individuals who became saints. And it is my opinion that, since I have met a number of folks with nearly an identical version of my problem, the Church is chasing away numerous individuals who could in fact become its strongest pillars.

So what I might add is that due to a number of considerations that I will not go into here, it appears that there is what one might call a “basic operating system” of the human, whom we can acknowledge is “made in the image and likeness of God.” Now God, personally, is not a Roman Catholic, else we would not recognize the different rites of the Church, nor would we conduct ecumenical or missionary activities. The assumption is that there is a basic pattern that renders everyone, regardless or status, salvable. Only we tend, since we are Catholic, and feel through dogma and tradition, that ours is the single-most way of attaining heaven.

That is well and good, and the Church in its awesome intellectual capacity has reasoned why this can appear to be so. And yet there is, experientially, a distinction between theory and practice. So my “way” has been to explore the underlying structure of human composition over which which Catholicism, or any faith, can be superimposed and felt to be actually a paradigm that corresponds to reality.

But as I said, for the vast majority of folks, faith as it is presented by the public and institutional Church is very adequate and very useful. It just didn’t go far enough for me in my hour of need.

And what need can’t Jesus meer of yours? Only a question,not an insult.

 

[CopticChristian]

Though I’m technically a Catholic, there were very serious questions for me during a period of my life and they are only now beginning to be resolved. And quite frankly, I wouldn’t and still don’t discuss the reasons why all this happened. That reticence is because I quickly discovered that few, actually no, people in the Church had any clue as to what I was talking about as far as my interior experience. Now I know better, but the people or Saints who clearly have a handle on what my concerns were. But even they were or are being given difficulties by the Church despite some of them now being Doctors of the Church. So in some instances there is something broken in the chain of information, largely I believe, because it is all about learned belief, and not so much genuine contemplative, mystical or graced experience,

It was very disconcerting to me that Catholicism din’t address my real concerns, or at least that the ideas necessary for my progress were so remote and restricted, that it turned out that it was thorough non=catholic means that my questions were addressed. It is for this reason that I have been pretty adamant that while the Church may serve very well as a religious format for many, and more than that for some, it does not immediately and publicly address certain phases of the spiritual maturation phenomena that one might experience. This can be seen in its history of how it dealt with certain individuals who became saints. And it is my opinion that, since I have met a number of folks with nearly an identical version of my problem, the Church is chasing away numerous individuals who could in fact become its strongest pillars.

So what I might add is that due to a number of considerations that I will not go into here, it appears that there is what one might call a “basic operating system” of the human, whom we can acknowledge is “made in the image and likeness of God.” Now God, personally, is not a Roman Catholic, else we would not recognize the different rites of the Church, nor would we conduct ecumenical or missionary activities. The assumption is that there is a basic pattern that renders everyone, regardless or status, salvable. Only we tend, since we are Catholic, and feel through dogma and tradition, that ours is the single-most way of attaining heaven.

That is well and good, and the Church in its awesome intellectual capacity has reasoned why this can appear to be so. And yet there is, experientially, a distinction between theory and practice. So my “way” has been to explore the underlying structure of human composition over which which Catholicism, or any faith, can be superimposed and felt to be actually a paradigm that corresponds to reality.

But as I said, for the vast majority of folks, faith as it is presented by the public and institutional Church is very adequate and very useful. It just didn’t go far enough for me in my hour of need.

My friend I find it difficult to dialogue or listen to someone that has something hidden and yet with that hidden stuff expounds with ethereal vagaries. God is not a Roman Catholic? Roman Catholics are Christians. Christians are followers of Christ. God is not a follower of Christ? Huh?

The Church is a religous format? I gotta tell you I don’t know what you are talking about. Reconcile the Scriptures produced by the OHCAC, the Scriptures that Christians of all stripes read and supposedly listen to…

The Church…the mystery hidden for all ages, through which the gentiles are made fellow heirs, the mystery hidden for all ages, the pillar and foundation of truth, The Church, the body of Christ, the Bride of Christ, the Church the mystery hidden for all ages through which the manifold wisdom of God is made known.

Now I don’t know, since you won’t tell what your issue is however I would suggest with that in mind I don’t understand what you are talking about.

While I don’t need to know the reasons for what it is you are talking about what is the issue that you speak of as to your interior experience.

We all have interior experiences. I know I have one and continue to have one. I don’t need to know particulars however possibly in generalities you could shed some light on said difficulties for understanding.

 

[CopticChristian]

Though I’m technically a Catholic, there were very serious questions for me during a period of my life and they are only now beginning to be resolved. And quite frankly, I wouldn’t and still don’t discuss the reasons why all this happened. That reticence is because I quickly discovered that few, actually no, people in the Church had any clue as to what I was talking about as far as my interior experience. Now I know better, but the people or Saints who clearly have a handle on what my concerns were. But even they were or are being given difficulties by the Church despite some of them now being Doctors of the Church. So in some instances there is something broken in the chain of information, largely I believe, because it is all about learned belief, and not so much genuine contemplative, mystical or graced experience,

It was very disconcerting to me that Catholicism din’t address my real concerns, or at least that the ideas necessary for my progress were so remote and restricted, that it turned out that it was thorough non=catholic means that my questions were addressed. It is for this reason that I have been pretty adamant that while the Church may serve very well as a religious format for many, and more than that for some, it does not immediately and publicly address certain phases of the spiritual maturation phenomena that one might experience. This can be seen in its history of how it dealt with certain individuals who became saints. And it is my opinion that, since I have met a number of folks with nearly an identical version of my problem, the Church is chasing away numerous individuals who could in fact become its strongest pillars.

So what I might add is that due to a number of considerations that I will not go into here, it appears that there is what one might call a “basic operating system” of the human, whom we can acknowledge is “made in the image and likeness of God.” Now God, personally, is not a Roman Catholic, else we would not recognize the different rites of the Church, nor would we conduct ecumenical or missionary activities. The assumption is that there is a basic pattern that renders everyone, regardless or status, salvable. Only we tend, since we are Catholic, and feel through dogma and tradition, that ours is the single-most way of attaining heaven.

That is well and good, and the Church in its awesome intellectual capacity has reasoned why this can appear to be so. And yet there is, experientially, a distinction between theory and practice. So my “way” has been to explore the underlying structure of human composition over which which Catholicism, or any faith, can be superimposed and felt to be actually a paradigm that corresponds to reality.

But as I said, for the vast majority of folks, faith as it is presented by the public and institutional Church is very adequate and very useful. It just didn’t go far enough for me in my hour of need.

I have read all of your posts and one thing that struck me was that you tend to empiricism. I also note you tend towards absolutes that confuse me.

That reticence is because I quickly discovered that few, actually no, people in the Church had any clue as to what I was talking about as far as my interior experience.

When I read this over and over I had to ask myself…this person spoke to all people in the Church? I wonder. I am not sure I understand you.