Name 3 reasons you are not Catholic (yet).

[Goth_Catholic]

gothpunk with a bizarre fashion sense. I wouldn’t blend well

My friend, goth and catholicism (I have problems spelling my own religion ) can be two halves in the same soul.

Plus it’s fun to walk into Hot Topic and find really cool stuff with Mary on it. I kid, I kid. Sorta.

 

[JoyfulOne]

It is not necessary to cast aspirations on my character. I am aware that I am no commodian. If I tried to be funny, people would just laugh at me.

Ooops–hope I didn’t discommode you

 

[Contarini]

I don’t think u have to worry about the Church taking over this world, if that’s what you mean… If anything, the world is taking over the Church.

I think the two things are related. . . .

However, currently I think the Catholic Church is doing an excellent job of resisting the spirit of the world. The problem is that it is scarred from previous attempts to exercise worldly power. I sometimes express this by an allegory that Tolkien would loathe I’m sure–Gandalf put on the Ring and Saruman cut it from his finger. Now Gandalf roams the world nine-fingered trying to rally resistance to Saruman, but no one trusts him because they think he just wants the Ring back. . . .

Jesus never chose women for Apostles. Jesus was a “rebel” and if he had wanted women as Apostles, he would have chosen them - or, if in fearing the Jews (etc), he may have held off making them Apostles until after his resurrection, then made it clear to the Apostles that they should replace Judas (& others) w/ women… Yet he didn’t…

This is an incredibly bad argument in more ways than I can count. Its prevalence among conservative Catholics is itself a strong indication of how bankrupt the case against women’s ordination is. Jesus was not a “rebel” for the sake of being a rebel. He never questioned slavery, for instance. Basing an argument on what Jesus allegedly would have done is about as weak as you can get.

Never mind that the limitation of the term “apostles” to the Twelve is somewhat dubious–what about Paul? (I won’t base anything on Junia, since there are plausible refutations of that argument.)

Jesus loved women. But women were mostly created by God to be nurturers (mothers/wives). Women who think this is somehow unfair are wrong. The greatest job in the world is motherhood… Through parenthood, people learn to be self-less and empathetic, etc… (more like Christ).

That’s irrelevant, as far as I can see. Unless you think priests shouldn’t be nurturers. . . .

Anyway, maybe another reason women shouldn’t be priests is that women were so eeasily deceived by the devil in the Garden… However, Man probably committed the greater sin by being outright disobedient… which is maybe hte reason Jesus had to be a man… (??). Only God knows the answers to some of these things… (and He aint tellin’ ).

I can respect the view that women’s ordination is simply ruled out by the Tradition and the Magisterium and we don’t at this point know why. It’s when Catholics try to give reasons why that they lose me, because the reasons are almost always unbelievably bad–or at best incredibly abstruse and far-fetched.

Edwin

 

[Mirdath]

My friend, goth and catholicism (I have problems spelling my own religion ) can be two halves in the same soul.

Plus it’s fun to walk into Hot Topic and find really cool stuff with Mary on it. I kid, I kid. Sorta.

Says the person who had no idea who Bauhaus or the Banshees were Have you checked out those recommendations yet?

And yes, I realize Jesus was gother than everyone. There used to be a pretty good list of reasons but it seems to have disappeared from the net. Pity, it was a classic.

 

[Fragile]

Says the person who had no idea who Bauhaus or the Banshees were Have you checked out those recommendations yet?

And yes, I realize Jesus was gother than everyone. There used to be a pretty good list of reasons but it seems to have disappeared from the net. Pity, it was a classic.

Saviour Machine, Wedding Party, I-Dragon-I, Virgin Black

 

[djrakowski]

I thought Catholics favored obstinance education in the schools

My dad is rather obstinate, and he attended Catholic schools through 8th grade - coincidence?

 

[Bishopite]

**[Contarini;2160030]**I think the two things are related. . . .

However, currently I think the Catholic Church is doing an excellent job of resisting the spirit of the world. The problem is that it is scarred from previous attempts to exercise worldly power. I sometimes express this by an allegory that Tolkien would loathe I’m sure–Gandalf put on the Ring and Saruman cut it from his finger. Now Gandalf roams the world nine-fingered trying to rally resistance to Saruman, but no one trusts him because they think he just wants the Ring back. . . .

I agree that the Catholic church does a great job in resisting the world, which shows us (or should) that their is something uniquely different about Catholicism than other churches. I also agree that the Catholic church has much more power than she asserts and if she did assert it she could impact that world substantially.

This is an incredibly bad argument in more ways than I can count. Its prevalence among conservative Catholics is itself a strong indication of how bankrupt the case against women’s ordination is. Jesus was not a “rebel” for the sake of being a rebel. He never questioned slavery, for instance. Basing an argument on what Jesus allegedly would have done is about as weak as you can get.

I disagree. The truth that Jesus only chose to ordain men as Apostles IS a piece of all the evidence that affirms men only as priests. In the order of creation Adam was created first then Eve, which doesn’t say that Adam is greater than Eve but that he is first in position among the two and is to be the leader. Also, God the Father is called “Father” not Mother even though God is neither since He’s a Spirit, yet He is called Father a male.
But the most irrifutable evidence is the Catholic Mass. The priest is persona christi (in the person of Christ) who is the groom. The audience or the people at Mass are the church, which is the bride of Christ. If a woman stands in as priest then we have two brides which is not only a coruption of the natural order of Christ and His bride, the church but an impossiblity for their to be a woman Jesus since He is always a male.

I can respect the view that women’s ordination is simply ruled out by the Tradition and the Magisterium and we don’t at this point know why. It’s when Catholics try to give reasons why that they lose me, because the reasons are almost always unbelievably bad–or at best incredibly abstruse and far-fetched.

It is ruled out as immpossible since in the Catholic Mass the priest is persona christi and a male stands as Jesus is a male who addresses His church the bride.

 

[Contarini]

I also agree that the Catholic church has much more power than she asserts and if she did assert it she could impact that world substantially.

That is not what I said.

I disagree. The truth that Jesus only chose to ordain men as Apostles IS a piece of all the evidence that affirms men only as priests.

There is no direct evidence in the Gospels that Jesus intended to exclude from ordination any group not represented in the Twelve. In fact no one claims this as a general rule. So you need to explain why gender is the only place where the principle applies. The mere fact of the maleness of the Twelve is not an argument in and of itself.

In the order of creation Adam was created first then Eve, which doesn’t say that Adam is greater than Eve but that he is first in position among the two and is to be the leader. Also, God the Father is called “Father” not Mother even though God is neither since He’s a Spirit, yet He is called Father a male.
But the most irrifutable evidence is the Catholic Mass. The priest is persona christi (in the person of Christ) who is the groom. The audience or the people at Mass are the church, which is the bride of Christ. If a woman stands in as priest then we have two brides which is not only a coruption of the natural order of Christ and His bride, the church but an impossiblity for their to be a woman Jesus since He is always a male.

By this logic, all men *must *be priests, because for a man to be part of the congregation would be just as monstrous as for a woman to be priest. I have brought this argument up over and over and over, and Catholics have no counter to it that I can recall ever hearing. But you keep making the same tired old argument anyway.

Edwin

 

[servus]

Could you please list 3 reasons why you are not Catholic and elaborate.

Thanks… God bless…

1. I believe that Bible should be the number one rule of faith. even if you accept tradition, it should not contradict the Bible. But then one can push the interpretation button. How do I know I have the ability to correctly interpret the Bible? Well that is a question we probably could not agree on an answer for, though I could cite 2 Timothy 3:14-17.
2. I believe in personal religion, rather than primarily an institutional religion. Our faith should be worked out and understood relative to our individual experience, rather than that of the Church alone.
3. I believe in the Universal body of Christ. All churches which claim Christ as Lord have equal claim to Him as thier founder. Determining the Church is not a forensic method using genealogies and fiats but a question of belief and teaching. There is therefore no need to be apart of the Catholic Church.

 

[Chancellare]

I’m curious as to why ex-Catholics hang out here? If you’re so free and liberated now, why return to people who think in a way in which you now disapprove? Nostalgia? Sincere fellowship? Trying to persuade the Catholics here to leave the Church?

Sorry if this is a derail. I was just curious. As usual.

You raised a valid point. According to forensic scientists, suspects who feel a mixture of guilt and emptiness from their past deeds return to the scene of the crime, inexplicably.

 

[Bishopite]

That is not what I said.

Alright. Then clarify what you meant, remember words don’t always convey emotion, intination nor inflection.

There is no direct evidence in the Gospels that Jesus intended to exclude from ordination any group not represented in the Twelve. In fact no one claims this as a general rule. So you need to explain why gender is the only place where the principle applies. The mere fact of the maleness of the Twelve is not an argument in and of itself.

 

[melandave]

its an apostate religion built up for gain the its leadership going to the higest bidder in the early church and maybe even connected with crime ( political )

id rather worship God than Mary. whom the pope said saved the world I always taught it was Jesus that saved us then again i dont have apostate views

its doctrine of the trinity is not taught in the bible.

its a shame you only wanted 3 reasons…

I’m afraid your statement is false. The doctrine of the Blessed Trinity does appear in the bible…

 

[ReflectHim]

1. Don’t believe it to be any where close to being the Church Christ died from

2.Contridicts scriptures

3.The pope

 

[kujo313]

Calling what I believe in “weird” does not give me a lot that is useful to work with but I will try and explain in a way that may help.

Catholics do not beleive that the souls of the faithful departed are DEAD…I am not “praying to a dead person” but asking a soul whom I beleive to be in heaven to pray for me…just as I would ask someone here on earth to pray for me.

If you beleive that the soul dies along with the body then I guess, yes, you would believe I am praying to a dead person. I believe that the souls of faithful people are very much alive and close to God and eager to pray for me. I hope this makes a little sense. Thank you.

There’s nothing like human interaction. Us on earth, alive and well today, need it and can pray for one another. However, Jesus said, more than once, that we can go DIRECTLY to God IN His Name! THAT’S the ONE MEDIATOR!
To ask any dead saint (physically died, you KNOW what I mean) to take your prayer request to God is making Jesus that much less of the ONE Mediator that He is.

Example: If your earthly dad was the owner of a company that you and I worked for and you said that I have to go through YOU to talk to him because YOU are the only “link” between us and him, WHY would I go through anybody else?
You’d say to me “I SAID that I was the only way.”
After you’d tell me that several times, how would that make you feel if I kept going to other people?

The saints in Heaven have “made it”. Instead of side-stepping Jesus and taking up our prayers, I’m sure they’re cheering us on saying, “You can make it!”

 

[Bishopite]

1. I believe that Bible should be the number one rule of faith. even if you accept tradition, it should not contradict the Bible. But then one can push the interpretation button. How do I know I have the ability to correctly interpret the Bible? Well that is a question we probably could not agree on an answer for, though I could cite 2 Timothy 3:14-17.

2 Tim 3:14-17 does NOT say that the bible is the only authority, just that it IS AN authority. And if you and every other Protestant who says they have the ability to correctly interpret the bible then why is there such division within Protestantism?

1. I believe in personal religion, rather than primarily an institutional religion. Our faith should be worked out and understood relative to our individual experience, rather than that of the Church alone.

 

[kujo313]

2 Tim 3:14-17 does NOT say that the bible is the only authority, just that it IS AN authority. And if you and every other Protestant who says they have the ability to correctly interpret the bible then why is there such division within Protestantism?

 

[Contarini]

Alright. Then clarify what you meant, remember words don’t always convey emotion, intination nor inflection.

 

[kkieft]

RCIA- I cannot attend nighttime RCIA- my wife and I own a business so I have my daughter in the evenings.

I am already baptized and confirmed in the Lutheran church, but haven’t been affiliated with the Lutheran church in quite a while. I feel i’ve done a lot of research and been to mass enough that I shouldn’t have to join the non-baptized people in the same program.

I still go to mass, actually went twice last week, so in my heart I’ve joined the Catholic Church, and eventually i’ll be able to join in full communion, and I’ve asked the blessed virgin to pray so that I find my true way.

 

[SuzieB]

RCIA- I cannot attend nighttime RCIA- my wife and I own a business so I have my daughter in the evenings.

I’m surprised that they don’t offer childcare. We had a couple in my RCIA class that kept their children with the in class.

I am already baptized and confirmed in the Lutheran church, but haven’t been affiliated with the Lutheran church in quite a while. I feel i’ve done a lot of research and been to mass enough that I shouldn’t have to join the non-baptized people in the same program.

Talk to the priest about this. Exceptions can be made. RCIA classes can be alot of fun. I really enjoyed mine. It was a really great community.

I still go to mass, actually went twice last week, so in my heart I’ve joined the Catholic Church, and eventually i’ll be able to join in full communion, and I’ve asked the blessed virgin to pray so that I find my true way.

God Bless you on your journey.

 

[Bishopite]

[Contarini;2165295]

Since it’s hard for me to see how you got what you said from what I said, I don’t know how to clarify it. I suppose you were overinterpreting my Gandalf analogy. Remember that I’m imagining a Gandalf who had put on the Ring (which the “real” Gandalf never did!) and had then lost it–a very different being from the Gandalf we know in Tolkien, which is precisely my point.

If the Gandalf analogy is confusing you, ignore it.

Ah…I see.

No, you’re using an argument from non-action. I’m not basing an argument on what Jesus didn’t say, I’m saying that your argument cannot be based on what He didn’t do.

I said the best argument for women NOT becoming priests is the Catholic Mass, and if you reread my last post you’d see that the priest is persona christi, the rest of us are examples of the church, the bride of Christ. You can’t have two brides or two grooms, well I suppose one could but that would be against the moral law of God.

Apples and oranges. I’m not saying “women must be ordainable because Jesus never said they weren’t.” The ordination of women is based on the fact that women are made in God’s image and can share in the divine nature through baptism. That’s all the foundation it needs.

No, that’s the Anglican, Episcopalian version NOT the Catholic version. Using your analogy that we are all created in God’s image and should therefore all be equal in task, then men should be able to birth children. Women do not represent Jesus as a male and He IS a male.

Exactly. And that argument fails, as I have pointed out. Since you said it was the main argument, I addressed it. I actually think that the Adam/Eve argument has far more weight–mostly because St. Paul appeals to it. I think that modern papal teaching casts doubt on how far it can be pushed, however. I admit that I dodged the Adam/Eve argument because it is harder to refute, but I think I was justified in doing so because you claimed that the liturgical argument is the clincher. I am happy to have a discussion (well, actually not happy because it’s very difficult, but willing) about gender and the order of creation. But this liturgical argument does seem to be a linchpin for the case against women’s ordination, and it’s an extremely wobbly one.

Actually, no really since the Catholic Mass is again representative of the priest being in the person of Christ. Only a male can be in the person of Christ since Jesus is only a male and will only ever be a male. Women have their own unique roles in which men can NOT participate; that being child birth.

I will hold you to this a little later!

Looking forward to it.

But your speculations as to His purpose are just that, speculation, unless they are based on some broader framework. The fact that Jesus had a purpose does not authorize you to invent a purpose and ascribe it to Him!

Note that above you used the word “priest” simply and without qualification to mean the ordained priesthood. That is of course what I was talking about, and you surely knew this. So it’s hard to interpret this invocation of the universal priesthood as other than a bit of deliberate irrelevance, though in charity I’d prefer not to accuse you of anything so dishonest.

It is precisely because all baptized people are priests that I believe all baptized people are capable of being ordained to the ministerial priesthood. But I am not making that argument here.

I repeat my argument: if only men can be *ordained *priests because *ordained *priests represent Christ in the Eucharist, then only women can be laity (indeed, only women can participate in the Eucharist in any role other than that of celebrant) because laity constitute the Bride of Christ liturgically. This is a simple and as I see it irrefutable argument. If the priest takes the “male” role, then the congregation is taking the “female” role. So if the priest must be male, then all the congregation must be composed of females. This is obviously absurd. Therefore your argument is absurd as well.

I await an answer to this. An *answer, *not another irrelevant digression.

In Christ,

Edwin

I will address this asap. I ran out of time.