Non-Catholics, what do you dislike most

[MH84]

Based on whats happening in the real world.

Like when a couple who was married by the church at 18.And 2 years later the guy cheated and left his wife for another woman. The rcc law demands the 20 yr old wife to be single forever. At that young age she is sure to fall in love with another.

These things happen in reality and church or no church catholics in this scenario follow their heart, not the ridiculous church laws.

Where do you draw the line though. I suppose if you allow divorce in case of adultery you’ve got to allow other occasions. When the spouse is abusive, cheating perhaps. What about if the wife merely changes her mind or thinks that the husband is cheating, or he’s not good in the bedroom? Its too complicated. People would abuse the system. When you make a vow, its a vow.

The Church allows anullments in certain situations. I don’t know the details though.

 

[gigageek]

Based on whats happening in the real world.

Like when a couple who was married by the church at 18.And 2 years later the guy cheated and left his wife for another woman. The rcc law demands the 20 yr old wife to be single forever. At that young age she is sure to fall in love with another.

These things happen in reality and church or no church catholics in this scenario follow their heart, not the ridiculous church laws.

But that is precisely why God gave us these laws and teachings. To protect us from the real world. These laws and teachings are only an option for us because of the gift of free will. But when we chose the things of this world over the gifts of God, that is when we fall into sin.

I am a Catholic and like many non-Catholics believe that in partaking in the life of Christ it lessens the pull of this world on my life. Therefore to consider adultery is to reject Christ. And if I reject Christ and partake in adultery then divorce is rightly the next step down that slippery slope to eternal damnation.

Scripture clearly says that when one of us fails we should seek forgiveness and make amends, repentance and sin offering. Jesus seeks mercy and forgiveness not judgment and separation.

So divorce is allowed, pre-Jesus, and not, post-Jesus, because it is not ours to seek lest we seek to part ways with God.

 

[ChristianRoots]

(3) would be papal infallability. All of the arguments that you all claim support the pope being incapable of error really only support the idea that God designed one central, authoritative church. There is a logical difference between one scoring 100 on a math exam and being unable to score anything other than 100 on a math exam. There is a logical difference between being an authority on an issue and being unable to be incorrect on an issue. Your arguments only support the lesser of these possibilites.

Wrong. The Pope, protected by infallibility, could also score a 0 on the TEST. You see papal infallibility only **prevents **the teaching of wrong doctrine. It doesn’t prevent the Pope from being silent on an issue that later on would be believed by the faithful. The Pope can get any possible range of scores from 0-100, depending on which questions he wants to answer and which ones he doesn’t.

Just so we are clear, Popes are not perfect, they can make mistakes on thousands of issues (they are protected from making mistakes only when doctrines and morals are concerned), and some Popes have been very bad people. But they are protected from teaching error to the entire faithful concerning doctrine and morals. If the Pope could teach error concerning doctrine and morals, then the gates of Hades would have overcome the Church. Jesus, however, promised that would never happen.

 

[AgnosTheist]

But that is precisely why God gave us these laws and teachings.

From God? That is really just a matter of opinion.

 

[Deacon110]

To the non-Catholics on the board–what do you dislike most about the Catholic Church?

What 3 doctrines are most problematic for you? What do you know about those 3 doctrines, and what exactly do you disagree with?

1. Perpetual virginity of Mary which I’m more than happy to debate anytime. In another thread of course.
2. Papal infallibility
3. Transubstantiation

 

[Deacon110]

That’s unfortunate that you fee this way - but I TOTALLY understand.
**I, myself have been less **than charitable from time to time to non-Catholics. Let me rephrase that - ANTI-Catholics. I think that most of the Catholic posters on this board only get that was because of the attacks against our faith - not the questions.

I would rather spend my day dialoging with people about our faith than arguing about it. I feel that we can give a little on both sides of the coin.

I have always considered myself “Pro-Catholic”, not “Anti-Protestant”.

What do you consider attacks though?? Many baiting threads here are started that solve nothing. I would love to see just good spirited debate. Pick something and debate it both ways. That’s how we learn and ultimately I think that’s how we unite.

Instead it’s usually that there’s no way anyone BUT the RCC can be right. Phrases like what authority are you speaking from, or who made you pope, really de-rail things quickly.

 

[gigageek]

From God? That is really just a matter of opinion.

I guess I don’t understand your statement, would you do me the courtesy of explaining?

 

[AgnosTheist]

Where do you draw the line though. I suppose if you allow divorce in case of adultery you’ve got to allow other occasions.

biblically speaking that is the only exception ive heard of coming from christians.

When you make a vow, its a vow.

People often see the marriage vow as a treaty between two individuals. If one breaks his/her vow/treaty, then the other one is released from his/her vow. Afterall the marriage vow does not say “I promise to love and support you even if you cheat on me!”.

 

[AgnosTheist]

I guess I don’t understand your statement, would you do me the courtesy of explaining?

Christians themselves cant agree among themselves whether or not Jesus allows divorce in the bible. Thats why its just a matter of opinion.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Just to clarify…no divine revelation. And I don’t know for sure that this is actually the case.

But I am capable of observing and drawing conclusions.

The logic here is that mortal sin damns a Christian to hell unless it is repented of in confession.

So if I were to observe (hypothetically of course):
(1) A high percentage of Catholics committing mortal sin like not attending mass or holy days of obligation (not to mention nonvisible mortal sins that statistics tell us are common like masturbation). (BTW I have seen statstics posted here that this is the case…I am not going to go search and find them…sorry)
(2) A low percentage of Catholics going to confession…and an even lower percentage going to confession more than once a year (also I have seen statistics posted here that this is the case).

I would certainly be capable of adding 1+1 and coming up with 2.

Yes, but you do not know the hearts of men. You could be capable of drawing up the wrong conclusions who goes to heaven. You can’t assumed that just Catholics make up the majority in hell. Hell is for those who do not repent. They include Protestants.

Oh, and believe there are those Catholics who go to Confession on a weekly basis like myself. I think the majority of Catholics in here goes to Mass on a monthly basis. The second place is going to confession every two weeks.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Christians themselves cant agree among themselves whether or not Jesus allows divorce in the bible. Thats why its just a matter of opinion.

Jesus does not permit divorce. Nor does his Catholic Church.

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t do this often, but I agree with Mozart on one point. There will be a lot of Catholics in hell because of a lack of confessions.

Some do not go because they do not understand the need…that may or may not be their fault. Some do not go because they think that they do not need to…again, that may or may not be their fault. Some do not go because they simply do not want to…that is their fault. In any event, most people do not go enough.

 

[Deacon110]

The Catholic Church cannot back out of Papal Infallibility. It is part of Divine Revelation. It is part of the Deposit of faith. It cannot change. If the Church were too, then she would fall into error. Look what happened to other Catholics who left Rome. The Old Catholic ordained homosexual priests, homosexual marriage, and ordained women priests.

Manny this is where the argument falls off the cliff though. The fact that you claim the Pope can’t back out of infallibility assumes he always was. There are plenty of arguments that say he legitimately cannot be. But you won’t listen to them because you start with this belief so anything to the contrary is just a waste of time. I wonder if you are aware of how the infallibility thing really got started.

Papal Infallibility cannot be compromised. The Catholic Church does go by the opinions of others, particularly Protestants who really don’t have any say in Catholic Church’s teaching.

You mean the Catholic church doesn’t go by the opinions of others? You’re contradicting yourself here.

Interpreting Scripture has to be read in the same Holy Spirit who inspired the Book in the first place. If it wasn’t, people will interpret the Scripture in different ways, and can misinterpret a particular passage in the Bible. You can easily justify murder by interpreting the Bible by yourself without a guide to lead you.

Manny I can give you strong evidence that Mary was not a perpeutal virgin. But you wouldn’t consider it because that would mean going against what you consider to be infallibility placed only with the RCC.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church gives a good advise concerning interpretation of Scripture.

109 In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words.

Who says the only people that can do this are the teaching Magisterium?? Where in scripture specifically?? Suppose they understand it wrong?

110 In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. “For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression.”

If you do this then you will see Mary wasn’t a perpeutal virgin.

111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written."

The Spirit guides us all to the truth

The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.

112 1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.

The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church").

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

Again why are the teaching magisterium the only ones who can do this?

 

[Mannyfit75]

I don’t do this often, but I agree with Mozart on one point. There will be a lot of Catholics in hell because of a lack of confessions.

Some do not go because they do not understand the need…that may or may not be their fault. Some do not go because they think that they do not need to…again, that may or may not be their fault. Some do not go because they simply do not want to…that is their fault. In any event, most people do not go enough.

He is right but he cannot say that majority of them are Catholics are in hell. For all we know the majority of people in hell could be Muslims or Protestant. It is also apparent that Protestants don’t have confession either… so they could go to hell if they die an unrepentent sinner.

 

[RedSoxFan]

From God? That is really just a matter of opinion.

Can’t be opinion, he either did or he didn’t. Consensus won’t find you the truth on this one.

 

[MH84]

Manny I can give you strong evidence that Mary was not a perpeutal virgin. But you wouldn’t consider it because that would mean going against what you consider to be infallibility placed only with the RCC.

Evidence? Wow, are you the man to bring down Catholicism?

Are you talking in general, or do you actually have this evidence?

 

[ralphinal]

He is right but he cannot say that majority of them are Catholics are in hell. For all we know the majority of people in hell could be Muslims or Protestant. It is also apparent that Protestants don’t have confession either… so they could go to hell if they die an unrepentent sinner.

I agree about the majority statement. That implies knowledge of the state of the soul of the person.

 

[Deacon110]

The Church didnt make this up. Jesus Himself did not allow divorce.

Mark 10:
5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’[a] 7’For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,** 8and the two will become one flesh.’[c] So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=10&version=31&context=chapter**

MH84 you are missing a few pieces of this though. Look at the comparitive text in Matthew and you will see Jesus gives us an exception which is porneia in greek. Now this is interpreted many different ways but in fact one word used in the Greek Lexicon is adultery.

I agree we don’t take marriage serious enough but you can’t get around that Jesus says don’t divorce except for porneia. He gives an exception plain and simple.

 

[Deacon110]

The Church allows anullments in certain situations. I don’t know the details though.

I can speak to this as I went through it and so did a cousin of mine for different reasons though.

 

[gigageek]

Christians themselves cant agree among themselves whether or not Jesus allows divorce in the bible. Thats why its just a matter of opinion.

I agree that we people can’t agree on what the Bible says, but that doesn’t negate that it quotes Jesus as saying it is unlawful to divorce.

More importantly though is you previous comment about the real world. Even if you and I agree to disregard Jesus’ teaching on divorce in the Bible, can we at least agree that we should not live according to the teaching of this real world, but rather those of our Father in heaven?

Can we agree that what this real world has to offer is sin and suffering unless we “choose” God over man?

If so then divorce is a factor of sin and doesn’t need to be Biblically stated. Because we would “choose” to avoid those things that are sinful and divorce would never need to be an option. But since so many of us continually choose the real world over the graces from God, we feel compelled to have these sin extensions, like divorce. In my mind this means we are being compelled by sin and not by God.