A
ABello
Guest
To agapewolf:
“To clarify…the Catholic church has never, nor will ever ever change doctrine.”
Thank you for the clarification. I still tend to get a little bit confused regarding the differences between “doctrine,” “dogma,” and “disciplines.” I was under the impression that dogma was the rock solid one, and doctrine is more flexible.
To HouseArrest:
“I would say you’d need to be sure your “promise” and the Church’s “promise” are the same thing. In talking to your priest during marriage prep, I would bring this up.”
I agree.
“But if I leave as clause in there the whole time that they don’t “have to” believe it, then I am really not raising them Catholic. Not really. I am sneaking in a doubt. I am telling them that there is a chance that what we are teaching them is not true.”
It’s been said earlier that I do NOT believe that the Catholic Church is truth…so any way I teach my children about the church, I think it would be irresponsible of me to NOT sneak in some doubt. If what I have proposed regarding how I would intend to raise my children “in the catholic faith” is not sufficient, it makes me wonder how ANY non-Catholic marrying a Catholic could possibly make this promise and mean it. Who in their right mind would try to convince their child that something is “absolute truth” when they don’t actually believe it themselves?
To agapewolf/Feanaro’s Wife:
*“This is what proves its truth. As a human institution, it should have folded by now, but because it has the Holy Spirit preventing from teaching error, and the truth never ever changes, (2+2=4), this is how it has held strong this long and will till the end of time.”
“Yeah, 2000+ years of not being screwed up by us, wow! That was a huge factor in my own conversion.”*
Serious flaw in reasoning here. Of course, anyone is free to disagree….but this is the way I see it:
Being old doesn’t equal being right. Also, 2000 years isn’t old. It’s a blip on the timeline of Earth’s history, and it may very well be a blip on the timeline of Earth’s future. Take the ancient Egyptians, for example (they’re not quite a religion, but they still represented a set of beliefs). They hung around for three millennia. Then it was all over. If someone was standing around in 1142 BC, after the Egyptians had been hanging around for 2008 years and said “this Egyptian culture has hung around for 2000+ years…since it’s old and we humans haven’t brought it crumbling to the ground yet, this proves that what we believe in is the truth, and we’ll be around until the end of time.”
Let’s think about it…if older is better and reform is never needed, perhaps we should all be Jewish.
“To clarify…the Catholic church has never, nor will ever ever change doctrine.”
Thank you for the clarification. I still tend to get a little bit confused regarding the differences between “doctrine,” “dogma,” and “disciplines.” I was under the impression that dogma was the rock solid one, and doctrine is more flexible.
To HouseArrest:
“I would say you’d need to be sure your “promise” and the Church’s “promise” are the same thing. In talking to your priest during marriage prep, I would bring this up.”
I agree.
“But if I leave as clause in there the whole time that they don’t “have to” believe it, then I am really not raising them Catholic. Not really. I am sneaking in a doubt. I am telling them that there is a chance that what we are teaching them is not true.”
It’s been said earlier that I do NOT believe that the Catholic Church is truth…so any way I teach my children about the church, I think it would be irresponsible of me to NOT sneak in some doubt. If what I have proposed regarding how I would intend to raise my children “in the catholic faith” is not sufficient, it makes me wonder how ANY non-Catholic marrying a Catholic could possibly make this promise and mean it. Who in their right mind would try to convince their child that something is “absolute truth” when they don’t actually believe it themselves?
To agapewolf/Feanaro’s Wife:
*“This is what proves its truth. As a human institution, it should have folded by now, but because it has the Holy Spirit preventing from teaching error, and the truth never ever changes, (2+2=4), this is how it has held strong this long and will till the end of time.”
“Yeah, 2000+ years of not being screwed up by us, wow! That was a huge factor in my own conversion.”*
Serious flaw in reasoning here. Of course, anyone is free to disagree….but this is the way I see it:
Being old doesn’t equal being right. Also, 2000 years isn’t old. It’s a blip on the timeline of Earth’s history, and it may very well be a blip on the timeline of Earth’s future. Take the ancient Egyptians, for example (they’re not quite a religion, but they still represented a set of beliefs). They hung around for three millennia. Then it was all over. If someone was standing around in 1142 BC, after the Egyptians had been hanging around for 2008 years and said “this Egyptian culture has hung around for 2000+ years…since it’s old and we humans haven’t brought it crumbling to the ground yet, this proves that what we believe in is the truth, and we’ll be around until the end of time.”
Let’s think about it…if older is better and reform is never needed, perhaps we should all be Jewish.