S
Shane400
Guest
Good evening everyone. My name is Shane and I am new to the forum.
I am posting bc I was looking for some help to find an affiliation or even a denomination/church that hybrids some Catholic theology and current Roman Catholic stances.
I was born and raised in a non-denominational Christian household, but all the relatives on my mom’s side are catholic. My grandfather died last year and I saw my mom take communion at his funeral. I asked if she was identifying as a Catholic again. She then told me the only reason she began identifying as a non-denom Christian is bc when she left she was taking birth control and didn’t want to feel like a hypocrite. She had her uterus removed and said that now that she’s not having any need for birth control that there’s no reason to stop her from identifying as catholic.
My aunt works for a Catholic Ministry at a local Parrish. And after discussing some catholic view points I’ve been pretty interested in catholic beliefs matching up with current beliefs.
As a non-denom I take ideas from all forms of Christianity, including Catholicism, but not Mormonism. I also consider other Early Christian writings from 0-500 AD that didn’t make it into the morutorian canon (New Testament prior to the bible being published). I also evaluate the New Testament books based on what I learned in an upperclass history class called Early Christian Writings that went into historical facts about books in the bible as well as motivations the Romans had for deciding what would be in the canon as well as the criteria for a writing to have what our professor called “criteria for canonicity.”
In a nutshell- I have a hard time taking the bible literally. It seems than most of my Christian friends and pastors at the churches I go to are pretty literal in interpreting the bible. In my class I learned that Revelation fought tooth and nail to even make it into the canon, and that the reason they put it in is bc they believes the author john was the same john who wrote earlier int the New Testament, but that his Greek was very different and sloppier than the earlier John, so it likely shouldn’t have been put in. I also wrote a term paper about a Catholic stance that revelation is actually a description of Nero’s persecution of Christians during Rome’s marttying of Christians. We also learned that Timothy and Titus were written by Romans in the name of Timothy and Titus with a political goal of keeping women from being leaders in the church eve though in the earliest churches with Paul women were ministering and charasmatic leaders, but Rome was highly sex segregated public and private sphere so in order for the religion to flourish in Rome they had to make Christianity seem to be against women being leaders in the church eve though in Pauls churches they were. They also seem to have an agenda of respecting all authority as divinely given and to never to be challenged. Christ challenged authority, and Ephesians says to put on the armpit of God to fight wickedness in high places and positions of power. So I don’t give a lot of attention to those two books. I don’t think that creation of the earth was literally seven days and that seven days in God time may not be seven days in our understanding of time. I also entertain the idea of the Big Bang being the creating force of the universe which the Pope recently said that the Big Bang isn’t in contravention of Christianity. After talking with my aunt and grandparents they seem to have a less strict interpretation who will go to heaven saying that our Jewish and Muslim Old Testament brothers in faith will go to, which I respond to more positively as I’ve never liked the concept of hell to begin with and wish people who are just following the beliefs of their religion won’t go. I don’t know where the concept originated but I think that purgatory is a more fair way to reward people who have lived better lives and have been trained to enter heaven more promptly than people who live bad lives but still have grace and aren’t prepared to enter heaven - hit let was raised by a strict Catholic mother and though it’s debated if he was a believer personally he made mentions of the all mighty creator in his books and defended Christianity in speeches whether for poltical reasons or not. I don’t think that his atonement for the life he lived should be as instantaneous as outstanding believers such as mother Theresa.
Well that’s all I really have on some catholic viewpoints that I happen to agree with. If you have any comments, or suggestions on an affiliation for me or how I should feel about my faith or churches that would fit my current views since I really don’t identify as Catholic but not totally on board with strict literal interpretations of the bible that a majority of mainstream Christians and churches identify with, I’m open to suggestions and comments.
Thanks!
I am posting bc I was looking for some help to find an affiliation or even a denomination/church that hybrids some Catholic theology and current Roman Catholic stances.
I was born and raised in a non-denominational Christian household, but all the relatives on my mom’s side are catholic. My grandfather died last year and I saw my mom take communion at his funeral. I asked if she was identifying as a Catholic again. She then told me the only reason she began identifying as a non-denom Christian is bc when she left she was taking birth control and didn’t want to feel like a hypocrite. She had her uterus removed and said that now that she’s not having any need for birth control that there’s no reason to stop her from identifying as catholic.
My aunt works for a Catholic Ministry at a local Parrish. And after discussing some catholic view points I’ve been pretty interested in catholic beliefs matching up with current beliefs.
As a non-denom I take ideas from all forms of Christianity, including Catholicism, but not Mormonism. I also consider other Early Christian writings from 0-500 AD that didn’t make it into the morutorian canon (New Testament prior to the bible being published). I also evaluate the New Testament books based on what I learned in an upperclass history class called Early Christian Writings that went into historical facts about books in the bible as well as motivations the Romans had for deciding what would be in the canon as well as the criteria for a writing to have what our professor called “criteria for canonicity.”
In a nutshell- I have a hard time taking the bible literally. It seems than most of my Christian friends and pastors at the churches I go to are pretty literal in interpreting the bible. In my class I learned that Revelation fought tooth and nail to even make it into the canon, and that the reason they put it in is bc they believes the author john was the same john who wrote earlier int the New Testament, but that his Greek was very different and sloppier than the earlier John, so it likely shouldn’t have been put in. I also wrote a term paper about a Catholic stance that revelation is actually a description of Nero’s persecution of Christians during Rome’s marttying of Christians. We also learned that Timothy and Titus were written by Romans in the name of Timothy and Titus with a political goal of keeping women from being leaders in the church eve though in the earliest churches with Paul women were ministering and charasmatic leaders, but Rome was highly sex segregated public and private sphere so in order for the religion to flourish in Rome they had to make Christianity seem to be against women being leaders in the church eve though in Pauls churches they were. They also seem to have an agenda of respecting all authority as divinely given and to never to be challenged. Christ challenged authority, and Ephesians says to put on the armpit of God to fight wickedness in high places and positions of power. So I don’t give a lot of attention to those two books. I don’t think that creation of the earth was literally seven days and that seven days in God time may not be seven days in our understanding of time. I also entertain the idea of the Big Bang being the creating force of the universe which the Pope recently said that the Big Bang isn’t in contravention of Christianity. After talking with my aunt and grandparents they seem to have a less strict interpretation who will go to heaven saying that our Jewish and Muslim Old Testament brothers in faith will go to, which I respond to more positively as I’ve never liked the concept of hell to begin with and wish people who are just following the beliefs of their religion won’t go. I don’t know where the concept originated but I think that purgatory is a more fair way to reward people who have lived better lives and have been trained to enter heaven more promptly than people who live bad lives but still have grace and aren’t prepared to enter heaven - hit let was raised by a strict Catholic mother and though it’s debated if he was a believer personally he made mentions of the all mighty creator in his books and defended Christianity in speeches whether for poltical reasons or not. I don’t think that his atonement for the life he lived should be as instantaneous as outstanding believers such as mother Theresa.
Well that’s all I really have on some catholic viewpoints that I happen to agree with. If you have any comments, or suggestions on an affiliation for me or how I should feel about my faith or churches that would fit my current views since I really don’t identify as Catholic but not totally on board with strict literal interpretations of the bible that a majority of mainstream Christians and churches identify with, I’m open to suggestions and comments.
Thanks!
Seek the Truth in humility and Faith.