Non-Catholics on these boards...

[Elizabeth]

SPOKENWORD:

Please Ric and Mango and anyone else who isn’t Catholic and thinks they know better or just isn’t interested: PLEASE look into even just (just?!?) The Eucharist from the Catholic point of view. If you take God with you, He won’t let you go or lead you into a lie, He won’t.

God bless you and be with you.

---

Elizabeth Mary

Hi Mary, I do take Jesus with me everyday. I am the temple of the living God and Jesus lives in me. You see I dont have to search for Him for He already lives in Me. I take the Eucharist very seriously. I thank God for what He did with His Son Jesus on the cross. Without the blood I could not be saved.

I realise how this could be misinterpreted but you are completely mistaken as to what I am saying here (don’t our preconceptions colour how we read stuff too though?!):-

About taking God with you, I simply meant, walk with God into any search for the Truth (- for e.g. looking into the Truth of the Eucharist -) and you won’t have to fear getting lost or being duped!! HE will reveal whatever Truth is to be discovered. I was not referring to the physical presence of Jesus in those who have received the Eucharist.

I am still not Catholic and haven’t received the Eucharist. I too know I am a temple of the Holy Spirit and that Jesus lives in me by His Spirit. Yeehah Yahweh! (Forgive any lack of reverence Lord!) But I am certainly not going to give up searching for Him if there’s a possibility of more, and more , and more,

So anyway - it’s worth a look don’t you think? (Or a second one?) Double dare! Ha!

ELIZABETH Mary xx

 

[Shari]

Churchmouse:

Ooooo…awful book. Fr. O’hare didn’t do Luther any justice in the book and attempts to paint Luther as an idiotic, sinful, mass of degradation. Some examples of what I mean:

This book was mainly put together with the writings from protestants and even Luthers followers. That was the point of the book. I will see if I can find the book you suggested also. Thanks I love to read.

 

[Ourladyguadalup]

Churchmouse:

Ooooo…awful book. Fr. O’hare didn’t do Luther any justice in the book and attempts to paint Luther as an idiotic, sinful, mass of degradation.

I will second Pax’s advice to let Luther speak for himself. If you can get your hands on a copy of Luther’s unexpurgated writings, (you may find it difficult to find them, check used booksellers) the level of mental disturbance is pretty clear.

 

[Elizabeth]

Tom of Assisi:

1. I am very curious how the earth is a woman and not a ball of dirt. Could this be explained to me specifically? If wiccans and pagans want a mother-figure to respect and venerate, then they have no further to look than Mary (who was actually a real person and a real mother–and not a planet)

I have similar points to make. The earth is a reflection and jewel of the Creator God’s creativity, not ‘creativity’ itself. It has life and the capacity to change and adapt and be beautiful and be a place where life is nurtured - because of the life of the Creator upon it and all the wonderful forces of nature that the only living God, our Creator set in motion. The earth’s beauty can provide a wonderful haven for each us.

We can focus too much on this though, without the balance of focus on the suffering of life upon the earth. We have our purpose in loving God and those near and far who just by being human will suffer. The earth itself is suffering and groaning and will pass away.(Science if nothing else predicts this.) If we worship the earth or any deified creations, anything other than the one true living God, our Creator, we will have seriously missed it - our chance for eternal life not eternal death. If there’s just a chance this is real, don’t you want to find out?

HEATHEN DAWN:

Please read a couple of things: A mind-blowing book by an incredibly brilliant scientist: ‘The Hidden Face of God’ by Gerald L. Schroeder .

…and DO pick up a** Bible ** and read in the Old Testament these Psalms:** 8, 96 and 139**
I believe you will be inspired; they are beautiful.

May our God in His great mercy bless you with the Truth and His peace through His Son Jesus Christ.

 

[Churchmouse]

Ourladyguadalup:

I will second Pax’s advice to let Luther speak for himself. If you can get your hands on a copy of Luther’s unexpurgated writings, (you may find it difficult to find them, check used booksellers) the level of mental disturbance is pretty clear.

Greetings!

I think I’ve allowed Luther to speak for himself, considering that I am fairly familiar with Luther’s writings. I would also be the first to say Luther was very complexed character, but to say he had “mental disturbance” is a tad overblown. Are you basing this strictly on O’Hare’s book? Do you have any citations to support his “mental disturbance”?

Peace,
CM

 

[Cindy]

Ric:

How do I determine the truth? From careful study of 1 John 4, we are able to identify five distinguishing characteristics of the Holy Spirit’s work to show us truth. 1.) Exalts the true Christ, 2.) Opposes Satan’s interests, 3.) Points people to the Scriptures, 4.) Elevates truth, and 5.) Results in love for God and others.

Where all other denominations disagree with each other is where the denomination(s) places preconceived beliefs and traditions in front of Scripture and closes their eye/ears to the Holy Spirit. All denominations (including the Roman Catholic church) does this. I don’t care how many denominations there are out there as long as all Christians are in unity as far as the Gospel of Jesus Christ is concerned.

That was/is a problem in the Church as a whole, the fact that some people (Christian or non) and their prejudgements of Scripture does choose what denomination that fit’s their theology. And the sad fact is that we have pews filled every Sunday with true non-belivers (but I’m glad they are there, they just might hear the Gospel for once!).

Yes, using the Bible alone will work, if the group you are in will listen to the Holy Spirit - but sad to say that rarely happens. Pride is a bad thing, and people hate to be proven wrong.

Yes, Cindy, Our Lord did establish a Church to teach in His Name and He promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide her into all Truth. We (all believers) are that Church, and on one church can lay a claim on being that Church! And we all have the Holy Spirit, we all just need to listen!

Ric,

There are a myriad of sincere Christian believers who claim to possess the true meaning of Scripture, and yet they continue to disagree on what the Bible means. What assurance do you have that your interpretation of Scripture is correct?

You seem to be convinced that the Holy Spirit has revealed the truth to you, but anyone who disagrees with you is in error and has not been “listening” to the Holy Spirit. How do you know with certainty that you have the truth, and that 2,000 years of Christian Tradition has been wrong?

Until you are able to see the problem, you will never be open to the solution.

God bless!

Cindy

 

[potterygirl]

potterygirl:

In a past issue of *This Rock *there is a statement that is so profound to me (as a newcomer who questioned the reformation), where Paul states in 1 Cor 1:10 about divisions of the church and to be leary of those who cause them (Romans 16:17)

Anyone like to shed some light on this! I loved this article by the way…it was truly incredible about a couple on their search (like me) to find the Truth. Page 36 may-june issue.

okay I am quoting myself…but did anyone read these scritptures?..and to read through 1 Timothy really opens the eyes!

 

[Churchmouse]

Well, I guess the same questions can be asked of Catholics

BTW, it would take a narcissist or an egomaniac to actually believe they cornered the market on truth, so no true Protestant would ever accuse anyone of not listening to the Spirit because of disagreement. Also, no Protestant would ever decry the use of tradition. Tradition is very valuable for many reasons. It is only when tradition contradicts good Scriptural exegesis when we have no use for it.

Peace,
CM

 

[Pax]

In catholic teaching, tradition and sound scriptural exegesis go hand in hand. You can’t have the latter without the former. Nor can you have the unity within the body of believers that Jesus prayed for by following the teaching of Sola Scriptura.

Moreover, catholic tradition and scripture do not contradict one another. Many catholic apologists have spent enormous amounts of time dispelling misconceptions held by non-catholics. Unfortunately, the misconceptions continue to be taught in non-catholic circles as if they were true.

There is so much to study and to learn. Catholics and non-catholics can gain much from one another. If we can encourage one another in love of God and discerning the truth, we will all benefit. Share some prayer, and love the Lord.

 

[JPrejean]

It is only when tradition contradicts good Scriptural exegesis when we have no use for it.

Alas, finding a conflict between Scriptural exegesis and Tradition is the surest sign that your Scriptural exegesis is not good.

 

[Malachi4U]

Crusader:

If you’re not in communion with the Vicar of Christ, the Pope of Rome, you ain’t Catholic.

What about Catholics who are not Roman Catholics? What about those who have chosen the Roman Catholic religion but cannot get their marriage ‘Blessed’ (because the spouse disaproves of the Catholic Church and has not had the scales lifted from her eyes yet) and are Catholic by ‘desire’ such as myself?

I am now 100% Catholic just not in full communion with Rome so to speak?

A prisoner of Christ.

 

[bboop]

G’morning – I am a non-Catholic. Episcopal/non-denom/Evangelical currently in RCIA.

 

[ILO]

Not often, but it has happened.

Ric,

The above quote is your reply to Little Mary’s question about how often your pastor contradicts the Scriptures.

Why does he do this? Are you saying that he deliberately contradicts the Scriptures? If so, why would he? If not, does he immediately change his view when you talk to him? (If so, perhaps you should be the pastor instead of him! ) If he does not change even then, it would seem to me that either he is obstinate in his error and you should not listen to him about anything or he really believes he is right and you are wrong. If this is the case, how do you resolve the impasse? Both of you read the same Scriptures and have come to different conclusions guided (supposedly) by the same Holy Spirit. How do you know for sure who is right?

In Christ’s Love,
ILO

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

MariaG:

Yes, you can find a lot of stuff of St. Francis of Assisi on line.
Here is a prayer of St. Francis.

Canticle of Brother Sun and Sister Moon of St. Francis of Assisi

Very nice.
Tom of Assisi:

but Chrictianity was a revealed religion–revealed directly from God, by God, through God (in Jesus Christ).

I don’t believe this.

Christ is the new Adam…and Adam was the first human being,

Adam wasn’t the first human being. We’re descended from ape-like creatures. Adam never existed, he and Eve are a fable.

If Wiccans and Pagans admit that God is really above all the other “gods” and “goddesses”,

They do?! That’s news to me.

but Wiccans and Pagans, in addition to the fact that their religion is only a few decades old, have NO agreement as to what the teachings and worship practices of paganism should be.

It’s called peaceful diversity. Whereas you Christians are divided into Catholics, Orthodox and thousands of Protestant denominations, each calling the other heretics, we pagans respect each other and cherish our diversity. There are many pagan religions because one size certainly doesn’t fit all.

Shouldn’t a religion be somthing you accept and have faith in, and not somthing that you either create or pick and chose the aspects that suit your life best?

I accept and have faith in my religion. That it is man-made doesn’t matter to me, since I believe all religions are man-made; only the Gods aren’t man-made.

I am very curious how the earth is a woman and not a ball of dirt. Could this be explained to me specifically?

The earth isn’t a real woman, it’s just a metaphor. The earth is the source of all life, just as a woman is the source of life.

thanks to all who have read my posting and to Heather Dawn for his good-natured and charitable responces to my questions and comments.

You’re welcome.

Elizabeth:

Please read a couple of things: A mind-blowing book by an incredibly brilliant scientist: ‘The Hidden Face of God’ by Gerald L. Schroeder.

Schroeder is Jewish. I’m a former Orthodox Jew, I’m quite allergic to anything Jewish.

…and DO pick up a Bible and read in the Old Testament these Psalms: 8, 96 and 139
I believe you will be inspired; they are beautiful.

They’re hymns to an invisible creator. I’d rather worship the creation. I can’t worship what I can’t see.

 

[Shari]

Churchmouse:

Greetings!

I think I’ve allowed Luther to speak for himself, considering that I am fairly familiar with Luther’s writings. I would also be the first to say Luther was very complexed character, but to say he had “mental disturbance” is a tad overblown. Are you basing this strictly on O’Hare’s book? Do you have any citations to support his “mental disturbance”?

Peace,
CM

I have read outside of O’hares book about how he used to see demons. Even my mom who is Lutheran went to see the movie Luther, based off of a book I haven’t read. And she said she could see why people would say he was kind of crazy(her words not mine) because in the movie he was rolling on the ground yelling and screaming. Other things have happened such as throwing an ink well at an invisible monster. You can still see the mark on the wall.

 

[II_Paradox_II]

JPrejean:

Alas, finding a conflict between Scriptural exegesis and Tradition is the surest sign that your Scriptural exegesis is not good.

I would submit though that this is precisely what is at issue here. Our fundamental epistemic starting points make a huge difference here just as they do in the issue of the bible’s inerrancy. If one assumes that tradition (or a given strain of it) is always consonant with scripture then you will be predisposed to accept the reasons given why seeming dissonance is really not, or at least is less dissonant than it first seems. Our opposite starting point that the two may not be playing in harmony does not predispose us to accept such justifications as have been made by apologists nor to think our perception of the dissonance is a bad thing, but an indicator of the questionable nature of that tradition itself.

ken

 

[Shibboleth]

Luther towards the end of his life was definitely starting to show signs of dementia; however, this does not mean that such things plagued his whole life. He was a deeply upset individual. He never originally meant to start a new church and I think he was always bothered that the reforms had to occur in such a fashion.

He was an Augustinian, through and through.

Upon his death they had an artist record his face, his peaceful face – because at that time people thought if you died with a horrified or pained look on your face it was a sign that you were being punished in the afterlife.

 

[Churchmouse]

Pax:

I will not make a judgment on this book and the quotes you made from it, in any direct way, because I haven’t read it. I have, however, read some of Luther’s own writings. Believe me, there is good reason to believe that Luther was an extremely troubled man. I will not quote Luther’s words, but I would suggest that you do your own research and be thorough. After you’ve done that you can then revisit Fr. O’hare’s book to determine just how much of an injustice, if any, it did to Luther.

Understood, but I have read some of Luther’s writings as well. However, I have thumbed through a friends copy of O’hare’s book and it is a slamfest.

I know evangelicals that have researched Luther thinking him a hero. After going to primary source material or as close to it as they could get, they discovered that he was indeed a very troubled man. Some have even given him labels that go beyond Fr. O’Hare’s remarks. Later some converted and they have done this as a result of reading everything they could about what the man said and did. It’s an eye opener!

Well, as far as igniting the Reformation, I wouldn’t classify him a “hero”, but I do credit him with being God’s man for this time. No one is saying that he wasn’t troubled, but let’s be fair, there are a lot of things one can say about him and a lot you can say about others . The church had its trouble souls as well. People are people regardless. If folks convert on the basis of finding out who Luther was or wasn’t, well that seems pretty fickle to me. No offense, but the Reformation was about change and not necessarily Luther.

Peace,
CM

 

[Churchmouse]

Shibboleth:

Upon his death they had an artist record his face, his peaceful face – because at that time people thought if you died with a horrified or pained look on your face it was a sign that you were being punished in the afterlife.

Hi Shibboleth,

That is interesting. Growing up Catholic, often I would hear about how Luther died screaming for mercy all the while shouting “I recant! I recant!” Your comments have laid that one to rest

Peace,
CM

 

[Churchmouse]

Shari:

I have read outside of O’hares book about how he used to see demons. Even my mom who is Lutheran went to see the movie Luther, based off of a book I haven’t read. And she said she could see why people would say he was kind of crazy(her words not mine) because in the movie he was rolling on the ground yelling and screaming. Other things have happened such as throwing an ink well at an invisible monster. You can still see the mark on the wall.

Hi Shari,

I saw the movie too. I thought he was accurately portrayed. The movie was produced by a Lutheran group. Luther was very troubled throughout, but my point is that O’hare’s book goes beyond (as shown in what I’ve submitted), he gets personal. It doesn’t attempt to be fair, but inflicts the authors own biases and hatred towards him.

Peace,
CM