Obstacles on the Road to Rome

[mark_a]

The Iambic Pen:

However, I’ve heard people say that things like missing weekly Mass would be a mortal sin. I guess I don’t see how a Catholic who goes to visit his Protestant family and decides to go to church with them instead one Sunday is really rebelling against God and rejecting his salvation.

Good point. I don’t have an answer.

Jesus didn’t say, "Do this, plus believe that my mother was conceived without sin; plus confess your sins to a priest; plus believe in the existence of Purgatory; plus believe the successors of my servant Peter will never teach error; plus believe it is a sin to eat meat on Fridays (for now); plus believe that you must attend mass every week, no matter what.

More good points. The “no matter what” part is a little overboard.

Do all this, and you can be pretty sure you’ll go to Heaven, but you’ll never have complete confidence of this." It just seems like the Catholic Church adds all these requirements for salvation that Jesus himself did not mention.

Jesus didn’t call himself a Trinitarian either.

But how do we know? The Gospel tells us that Jesus’ works were too numerous to record. The Church Jesus put in charge has had people posing extremely tough questions from the beginning. We haven’t made these things up just so Jesus’ story would be a little harder to believe. Shedding these things would make the story easier believe and make God easier to commit to.

Then there is the whole issue of having a priest as a mediator of sorts.

One of the toughest of all. No one likes to be humbled. And confession is extremely humbling if you have a biggie to confess.

When I was a kid, my Protestant friends parents aquainted drinking a beer with adultery. But did they call the preacher when their kids came home drunk or were running around with married women? Nope.

But when their kids were caught stealing or caught with drugs and had the possibility of jail time hanging over them, their parents called the preacher. They wanted to be sure their kids were on the right path when things got really serious.

Do you see the double standard? God knows we may need some counciling.

We were now free to confess our sins to God directly and obtain forgiveness for them.

Do you confess to the person you have mistreated? Do you confess aloud before the whole congregation as the early Catholics did?

It says God will forgive our sins, not a priest.

Correct. No one is forgiven if he is not sincere during confession. Any Priest will tell you the same.

According to Protestants, am I unforgiven because I confessed to a Priest?

Plus, I still have trouble accepting transubstantiation. I know what John 6 says, but I guess I still have a very scientific mind. It’s hard for me to believe in something for which there is no physical proof.

Welcome to the club. God knows you. He knows it’s hard. How many disciples left Jesus for this very reason? And when Jesus asked if the rest would leave, who said “to whom will we go”.

So, I ask that all of you would pray for me

10-4

Those of you who have read my other posts know that I have actually defended Catholic doctrine on several occasions, so I’m certainly not hostile to Catholicism. I’m just still very confused about what to believe. I thank you for all of your help so far on my journey!

Sincere questions are a breath of fresh air and can really help shake cobwebs from my own brain.

 

[neophyte]

Iambic Pen,

After struggling to free myself from the rock of Apostolic Authority, I decided that, because the Church had never contradicted itself on any doctrinal matter that I’d investigated, the matter had been proven and it was for me to submit.

My engineering background gave me some trouble, but one day I realized that only in the absence of God would all causes be observable and all reality measurable. So when Jesus said “this is my body, this is my blood”, and when the Magesterium taught from the earliest time that it was so – they meant it!

As a Protestant I had thought about the fact that God made us, man and woman, in His own image, how He made us to become one flesh as we join in an ecstatic and intimate union, and how he refers to the Church as his Bride. My mind always recoiled from where that led me, it seemed blasphemous.

Then I came to the realization that the Catholic understanding of the union of man and woman is far more radical than anything I’d ever heard in Protestant circles. We are made in his image, and it is in the marital embrace, when we give ourselves fully to our spouse as a free gift of ourselves, each open fully to the nature of the other and to the life that God may bless us with, that we image God most fully.

In the original Passover, God redeemed Israel from slavery to Egypt in a prefigurement of His redemption of us from slavery to sin. Then, having passed them through the waters of the Red Sea, He brought them into a covenant relationship, a family bond with Him, after which He repeatedly spoke of Israel as His spouse. Recall also that the Jews believe that, at the Passover meal, they are mystically present at the original Passover in Egypt so long ago.

In the laws of Levirite marriage and the story of Ruth, redemption is intimately tied to the making of family bonds and specifically to the marital union.
Recall what Hosea went through as an image of God’s distress over Israel’s adultery with other gods.

Think of the work of Christ on the cross: the true Passover, the more perfect sacrifice that actually does redeem us from slavery to sin. Think of our belief that Baptism is yet another more perfect sacrament, that actually does the cleansing that it is also symbolic of.

Given all of the symbols that, in the new covenant, are sacraments that actually do what they are symbolic of; and given the fact that God’s word does not return empty but actually accomplishes what it says – the Church must really be the mystical Bride of Christ. It’s not just an image, it’s REALITY. At Mass we return to the same eternal sacrifice, to be mystically present at the cross two thousand years ago, to renew our vows, individually and corporally, to our Redeemer, Lord and God.

Need one ask why missing this is a grave affair? Am I to tell my spouse that I missed our anniversary celebration because I was out spending money on prostitutes?

There’s no place I’d rather be on Sunday than at Mass in the real and substantial presence of Jesus. God allowed me to see a glimmer of light, and the closer I came to it the more I found that the teaching of the One, Holy and Apostolic Church has no dark places, no imperfections, no aberrations of logic, no lack of grace or fitness. I submitted, and the instant I was able to finally receive our Lord in the Eucharist I knew that nothing would ever be the same. I worship what I know only appears, for my own protection, to be a bit of unleavened bread, but what is really and truly our risen Lord, body and blood, soul and divinity, and it’s like I’m immersed in a vast, bottomless, endless river of living water that gushes up around and through me. I weep with joy and can’t sing the hymns. It’s like a light that grows ever brighter, purer, more beautiful, filling the universe with its presence so that it would either vaporize me or fill me to overflowing with life and grace – and yet I’ve only been brought to the shallowest depth.

Oh, my Jesus, my Lord, my King, and my God! Where else would I go? – You have the words of eternal life. Who am I that you should look at me with such grace? Do with me as you will, only never let me be parted from you. Amen, Amen.

 

[neophyte]

This is posted on the Catholic Encyclopedia at newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm:

The Sacrament of Penance is not a mere human invention devised by the Church to secure power over consciences or to relieve the emotional strain of troubled souls; it is the ordinary means appointed by Christ for the remission of sin. Man indeed is free to obey or disobey, but once he has sinned, he must seek pardon not on conditions of his own choosing but on those which God has determined, and these for the Christian are embodied in the Sacrament of Penance.

No Catholic believes that a priest simply as an individual man, however pious or learned, has power to forgive sins. This power belongs to God alone; but He can and does exercise it through the ministration of men. Since He has seen fit to exercise it by means of this sacrament, it cannot be said that the Church or the priest interferes between the soul and God; on the contrary, penance is the removal of the one obstacle that keeps the soul away from God.

It is not true that for the Catholic the mere “telling of one’s sins” suffices to obtain their forgiveness. Without sincere sorrow and purpose of amendment, confession avails nothing, the pronouncement of absolution is of no effect, and the guilt of the sinner is greater than before.

This is a summary of Chapter One of “Frequent Confession: It’s Place in the Spiritual Life”, by Benedict Baur. I highly recommend the book:

A person may go to confession because he is guilty of various weaknesses and bad habits, and strugles with his inordinate desires and his self-love. He wishes to purify his soul from every stain of sin, and to keep it pure and to keep his will directed toward God. He seeks inner purification, strength of will, and new strength to strive after perfect union with Christ.

There are other means by which venial sins are forgiven, however when we go to confession we receive a Sacrament. The merits of the death of Christ are applied to those who have sinned after Baptism; this action falls upon our aversion from sin, and elevates us.

This grace is the strengthening and deepening of the supernatural life that already exists in our souls, and an increase in our love for God. It stimulates our will to acts of love of God and of contrition for our sins.

This grace not only blots out sin, but also undoes its evil effects on our souls more fully than when venial sins are forgiven outside of confession. It cures the soul from the weakness that follows venial sin, from the weariness and coldness toward the things of God, and from the inclination toward worldliness. It delivers the soul from its reawakened inordinate inclinations and instincts.

It does all of this by the power of Christ.

An important advantage of sacramental confession is that it engenders a more careful examination of conscience and a more sincere attitude of contrition than we are inclined to make when we make use of other means of confession. Indeed, this is an essential part of the sacrament, and the measure of the effect of the sacrament is determined by it. It depends on our personal attitude toward our sins and on our turning back to Christ and to God. In the sacrament of Penance our personal acts of penance do not remain purely personal but are linked with the sufferings and death of Christ, from whom the power of the sacrament comes.

Another advantage to frequent confession is that our sins are confessed to the Priest in his capacity as representative of Christ, and thus, in a sense, to the Church and the entire Christian community. We do not need to rely on our own subjective feeling as to whether or not our sins have “really” been forgiven.

Frequent confession looks not only backward to our past failings, but forward to the future. It aims at the positive goal of strengthening our will in our struggle to acquire Christian virtue, to become pure and pleasing in God’s sight, and to make the spirit reign over the passions and weaknesses of the old man. It helps to foster a Christlike disposition, hatred of everything that displeases God, a desire to make satisfaction for our sins, and a readiness to accept all of the sacrifices and sufferings that the Lord may aloow to come upon us.

It provides an opportunity to avail oneself of wise spiritual direction.

 

[Matt16_18]

EA_Man:

So does receiving the Eucharist result in perfectly loving God and my neighbor or is there something else required as well?

God does not destroy our free will with his grace. A man can receive the Eucharist unworthily and bring nothing but condemnation upon himself.ex opere operato, ex opere operantis

Sacraments exist and work no matter what you believe, but you need faith to get anything out of them (CCC950). Two Latin phrases summarize this important point:

Ex opere operato: The sacrament works in general even if one of the participants does not believe or is unprepared

Ex opere operantis: The sacrament does not work for you in particular if you do not believe or are unprepared (CCC 1128).To use the Eucharist as an example: even if the celebrant at Mass is in a state of mortal sin, the transubstantiation still takes place (ex opere operato), but the priest would receive no sacramental grace from his communion (ex opere operantis).

www2.uiuc.edu/ro/network/meditations/]What_is_a_Sacrament.doc​

If I receive the Eucharist, am I assured of salvation?

No. A person is always free to commit unrepentant mortal sin sometime in the future. Antinomian heretics believe that once a man is “saved”, that he could die as an unrepentant, Satan worshipping child molester and still go to heaven, but that perverse thinking has nothing to do with true Christianity.

If I receive the Eucharist and I perfectly love God and my neighbor, am I assured of salvation?

No again. A man is ALWAYS free to become an unrepentant apostate that commits the unforgivable sin.

 

[Sherlock]

reen12:

Hi, Sherlock,

I think you may be conflating OSAS with blessed
assurance.

And, for heaven’ sake, will you give consideration to
leaving the golden calf “incident”, [in terms of debate],
and come rest with us blessed assurance sheep,
who huddle near the Shepherd, for warmth and comfort,
in this “vale of tears.”

Us sheep don’t know beans about OSAS.

Another “theological construct”, created by those
who spent too much time, reading St. Paul, and not enough
time, reading the gospels - in the humble opinion of
the blessed assurance flock.]

We trust the Shepherd to keep us safe, and lead us Home,
bleating all the way.

No question of “am I in a state of grace”, with
“certainty.” [theological construct, aka

“reason”],
rather the* scriptural *imagery of the Good Shepherd.

quote: Sherlock

And, by the way, the disjunction is not between
faith and reason, it’s between the exaltation
of reason [theological “systems” = a golden calf ?]
over that of the biblical imagery, which God Himself
used, to communicate with His flock.

[No wonder many of the critical personages in the
Hebrew Scriptures were shepherds.]

If us blessed assurance sheep can’t pay undue
attention to the theological “reasonings” and
“what about” speculations-going on about us-
it’s because the noise of the bleating- of us
sheep, crowded around the Shepherd - make it
hard to hear.

Kindest regards,

reen12

So sorry, but what Jesus are you referring to? The Jesus of the Jehovah’s Witnesses? The Jesus of the Jesus Seminar? The Jesus of Dan Brown? I don’t know how one can desire to be free from a “juridical mindset” without juridically deciding that Jesus as He is cannot be the Jesus that some claim He is. Simple logic will tell you (or should tell you) that they can’t all be right, as some are contradictory. Which means, some theological definitions and understanding are necessary, like it or not. Also, you’re contradicting yourself: if you say that you do not want a “juridical mindset”, which presumably means theological considerations, definitions, and judgements, then by what standard do you suggest, “I think you may be conflating OSAS with blessed assurance”? For starters, you have presumably studied or at least heard about OSAS at least enough so that you have rendered a theological judgement regarding it, and are making a juridical distinction between your belief and that of OSAS. But then you say, “Us sheep don’t know beans about OSAS.” How can that be, if you just suggested that I’m conflating your particular belief with OSAS?

See what happens when you fail to use the reason God gave you(note well I say “use”, and not “exalt”, which of course I oppose).

Less bleat, more think.

 

[reen12]

Hello, Sherlock,

The bleating of sheep is a kind of comforting sound,
sometimes, when they’re gathered around the Shepherd,
and all around is quiet.

I’m hoping that you’ll re-read my post, and consider the
difference between “juridical” and “judgement.”

quote: reen12

Us sheep don’t know beans about OSAS.

Another “theological construct”, created by those
who spent too much time, reading St. Paul, and not enough
time, reading the gospels - in the humble opinion of
the blessed assurance flock.]

Yup, that’s the reason some of us sheep are there,
in the pasture. We’ve done the “thinking”, even
achieved some distinction at same, academically.

Having done so, we realize that what the Shepherd
offers

“Come and learn from Me,
For I am meek and humble of Heart.”

quite out-strips the application of the Square of
Opposition, to some thorny theological “problem”-
which problem often is generated, because of all that “thinking.”

quote: Sherlock

Less bleat, more think.

If a person is willing to set down the books of theology,
and rest from strenuous thinking, h/she might, in the
stillness, come to understand that some of that bleating
is prayer…and some, an expression of peace and safety,
and, yes, love.

quote: Sherlock

So sorry, but what Jesus are you referring to? The Jesus of the Jehovah’s Witnesses? The Jesus of the Jesus Seminar? The Jesus of Dan Brown? I don’t know how one can desire to be free from a “juridical mindset” without juridically deciding that Jesus as He is cannot be the Jesus that some claim He is. Simple logic will tell you (or should tell you) that they can’t all be right, as some are contradictory. Which means, some theological definitions and understanding are necessary, like it or not

.

“Simple logic” is what led me to the pasture.
That seemed to be the case, in the begining -and now I realize that that simple logic was the Logos.

Best to you, Sherlock,

reen12

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

scylla:

God isn’t the author of confusion. It is everyone’s opinions, ideas about what is their own truth, finding fault with everything, many reasons for confusion.

That is certainly true. I guess the difficult part is knowing when something is really what God wants us to do, and when something is just a person’s opinion.

Pray and have patience, it sometimes takes a while to work out.

I will definitely be praying! And patience is something I am beginning to develop. After all, some people studied Catholicism for years before accepting it. I shouldn’t be too upset if I’m still in the studying phase after two months.

Matt16_18:

A Buddhist is both capable of loving God, and loving his neighbor, who can deny that? But the Buddhist is not capable of doing this perfectly, because a Buddhist is cut off from the sacraments of Christ’s church.

I see what you’re saying. Obviously, I want to serve God fully, not just squeaking by with the bare minimum. The question is, I guess (and this is really another thread, so I won’t push the question too much here), is whether the Buddhist’s love for God and his neighbor is enough to save him. I have long been bothered by the “no salvation outside the church” belief, for the simple fact that so many people have never heard. At any rate, there’s another thread about this, and I’ve posted in it too. Of course, even if the Buddhist’s love for God and his neighbor can save him, if one can love more perfectly in the Catholic Church, then obviously that is where I want to be.

mark a:

But how do we know? The Gospel tells us that Jesus’ works were too numerous to record. The Church Jesus put in charge has had people posing extremely tough questions from the beginning. We haven’t made these things up just so Jesus’ story would be a little harder to believe. Shedding these things would make the story easier believe and make God easier to commit to.

And I know the Catholic Church isn’t trying to make belief harder. For two thousand years, people from all kinds of backgrounds and levels of education have believed in the teachings of the Catholic Church.

neophyte:
Thanks for your beautiful description of the Eucharist and for your explanation of Confession. I think I understand it much better now.

The question of what one must do to spend eternity in Heaven is of prime importance, because what does it profit a man to “gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” This is where Protestantism is appealing, because it tells people they can have an assurance of salvation. Even those who do not accept “once saved, always saved” believe that we can have an assurance of salvation at any specific time, even if we could possibly lose that assurance in the future through a rejection of Christianity. To explain it better, the idea is that I can know if I die right now, I’ll go to Heaven.

Now, what kind of assurance does Catholicism offer? If a person is striving to serve God, and is (so far as he or she is aware) free of unconfessed mortal sin, can this person know that if he or she were to die right now, he or she would go to Heaven? When a righteous Catholic is on his or her deathbed, should his or her attitude be confidence or hope?

Thanks for your answers, everyone! God Bless!

 

[Mickey]

reen12:

bleating all the way.

Do you think that some people consider themselves to be sheep–and then one day they look in the mirror and see a goat! :bigyikes:

I think proper theological study, can help us discern the wolves in sheeps clothing. Just a thought.

Blessings,
Mickey

 

[javelin]

I posted this in another thread related to confession to a priest, and it was favorably received there. It touches on something that I think has been missing here so far, and that is the very public nature of sin:​

Rest assured that it is God who imparts the Grace of forgiveness, and praying for that forgiveness in repentance is a good thing to do (your previous prayer was not in vain ). In fact, every week near the beginning of Mass, Catholics as a community pray to God for forgiveness of sins. We say aloud:

“I confess to the Almighty God, and to you my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault. In my thoughts and in my words; in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do, and I ask the Blessed Mary ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you my brothers and sisters to pray for me to the Lord our God. Lord have mercy. Christ have mercy. Lord have mercy.”

I think this is a truly beautiful prayer.

One of the things that seems to be regarded differently between Catholic and Protestant denominations is the idea of how private sin truly is. Catholic doctrine recognizes that sin is not “just between me and God”. That position is very evident in the prayer above, where we confess that we are sinners publicly and ask everyone to pray for God’s mercy for us. In this way we lift each other up in our efforts to lead Godly lives. The general protestant position seems to be that sin is very personal, and mostly between the individual and God. Certianly they mostly will support the idea that one should ask one’s neighbor’s forgiveness as well as God’s, but that seems the extent of it.

From the Catholic perspective, there is much more to it than that. Sin has many effects. Not only does it act counter to our relationship with God and our ability to receive the Grace He offers, but it also affects all those close to us. You see, we are all a part of the Body of Christ, and when one part of that body allows sin into his/her life, that sin affects the whole body. Not only does my sin affect me and the person I sinned against, but it affects anyone who may know of what transpired in addition to spiritual effects we may not ever know of. Sin is how Satan weakens, divides, and attempts to separate us from Christ’s Body, which is our source of true life.

And so, since sin affects the whole body, repentence and forgiveness of the sin of one member is part of the mission of the whole body. If the person is disposed to repentence, public confession not only strengthens humility, but allows the body to pray with and for that person, as well as help that person remain accountable to his or her pledge to “go and sin no more”, as Christ commands. (You might ask about what happens if that person is not disposed to repentence. What does Christ say is for the good of the Body in that case? Pick up your Bible and see…)

At one time, I believe, all confessions were done in front of the entire church membership. Imagine that! Over the years, however, much from a practical standpoint, confessions for grave matters were heard privately by the representative of the congregation, the priest.

And just as previous posters have said, the priest also has a spiritual gift by virtue of his ordination (Christ commissioned His Apostles to spread the gospel in His name, giving them the power to act in His name in a miraculous way – the forgivenes of sins!), through the Grace of the Sacrament of reconciliation. The Church teaches that with grave sin – mortal sin – this sacramental Grace is the pre-emminent way God removes that sin and restores us to the state of Grace necessary for our salvation.

The bottom line is that God works through the sacrament, fulfilling His promise to never turn us away if we come back to Him, to impart to us His saving Grace. It is there waiting for anyone who seeks it. So, the only question is, what are people waiting for?

I wish you wisdom and blessings in your search.

Peace,
javelin

 

[Mickey]

javelin:

I posted this in another thread related to confession to a priest, and it was favorably received there. It touches on something that I think has been missing here so far, and that is the very public nature of sin:​

Rest assured that it is God who imparts the Grace of forgiveness, and praying for that forgiveness in repentance is a good thing to do (your previous prayer was not in vain ). In fact, every week near the beginning of Mass, Catholics as a community pray to God for forgiveness of sins. We say aloud:

“I confess to the Almighty God, and to you my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault. In my thoughts and in my words; in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do, and I ask the Blessed Mary ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you my brothers and sisters to pray for me to the Lord our God. Lord have mercy. Christ have mercy. Lord have mercy.”

I think this is a truly beautiful prayer.

One of the things that seems to be regarded differently between Catholic and Protestant denominations is the idea of how private sin truly is. Catholic doctrine recognizes that sin is not “just between me and God”. That position is very evident in the prayer above, where we confess that we are sinners publicly and ask everyone to pray for God’s mercy for us. In this way we lift each other up in our efforts to lead Godly lives. The general protestant position seems to be that sin is very personal, and mostly between the individual and God. Certianly they mostly will support the idea that one should ask one’s neighbor’s forgiveness as well as God’s, but that seems the extent of it.

From the Catholic perspective, there is much more to it than that. Sin has many effects. Not only does it act counter to our relationship with God and our ability to receive the Grace He offers, but it also affects all those close to us. You see, we are all a part of the Body of Christ, and when one part of that body allows sin into his/her life, that sin affects the whole body. Not only does my sin affect me and the person I sinned against, but it affects anyone who may know of what transpired in addition to spiritual effects we may not ever know of. Sin is how Satan weakens, divides, and attempts to separate us from Christ’s Body, which is our source of true life.

And so, since sin affects the whole body, repentence and forgiveness of the sin of one member is part of the mission of the whole body. If the person is disposed to repentence, public confession not only strengthens humility, but allows the body to pray with and for that person, as well as help that person remain accountable to his or her pledge to “go and sin no more”, as Christ commands. (You might ask about what happens if that person is not disposed to repentence. What does Christ say is for the good of the Body in that case? Pick up your Bible and see…)

At one time, I believe, all confessions were done in front of the entire church membership. Imagine that! Over the years, however, much from a practical standpoint, confessions for grave matters were heard privately by the representative of the congregation, the priest.

And just as previous posters have said, the priest also has a spiritual gift by virtue of his ordination (Christ commissioned His Apostles to spread the gospel in His name, giving them the power to act in His name in a miraculous way – the forgivenes of sins!), through the Grace of the Sacrament of reconciliation. The Church teaches that with grave sin – mortal sin – this sacramental Grace is the pre-emminent way God removes that sin and restores us to the state of Grace necessary for our salvation.

The bottom line is that God works through the sacrament, fulfilling His promise to never turn us away if we come back to Him, to impart to us His saving Grace. It is there waiting for anyone who seeks it. So, the only question is, what are people waiting for?

I wish you wisdom and blessings in your search.

Peace,
javelin

Wonderful post javelin!

 

[javelin]

Mickey:

Wonderful post javelin!

Thanks!

 

[Sherlock]

reen12:

Hello, Sherlock,

Yup, that’s the reason some of us sheep are there,
in the pasture. We’ve done the “thinking”, even
achieved some distinction at same, academically.

Having done so, we realize that what the Shepherd
offers

“Come and learn from Me,
For I am meek and humble of Heart.”

quite out-strips the application of the Square of
Opposition, to some thorny theological “problem”-
which problem often is generated, because of all that “thinking.”

If a person is willing to set down the books of theology,
and rest from strenuous thinking, h/she might, in the
stillness, come to understand that some of that bleating
is prayer…and some, an expression of peace and safety,
and, yes, love.

quote: Sherlock

reen12

Why do you see this as either/or? Why do you oppose thinking and love? Why do you separate faith and reason?

Sorry, but Aquinas was one of the greatest minds AND a saintly, holy, Spirit-filled follower of Jesus. The more he thought and reflected upon God, the more he was filled with awe and humble love.

Emotion-based devotion devoid of a rational basis has no appeal to me. It might appeal to some women, so I am all in favor of orthodox Charismatic groups and what-not for those who wish that form of worship. But you can’t seem to accept that not all people are like that, and instead of being able to accomodate other people, you come here to disparage the use of reason and put it in opposition to faith and love by shaking your finger at—tsk, tsk—theological discussions. My, you’re dogmatic. Just because these things have no interest for YOU, you think that those of us who don’t share your tastes are less in love with Jesus than you are. You’re so juridical.

 

[revbrothomas]

I am in the same boat, While I see much “orthodoxy” with the Roman Church I also see a whole lot of time and energy being spent on those “aspects of the faith” that seem well “non-essential” to my salvation. Yes my big hang up right now are the “Marian Doctrines” Why? not because they have not been presented in a “rational” way; because they have. But because they having nothing to do with my salvation. I mean why would I pray to anyone other than God, through Christ? If I can go straight to the top thanx to His Redeeming Blood?. I have heard the rational of “Oh, well if Mary takes your petitions to Christ they are more likely to be looked upon with favor.” Are you kidding me? This Rational implies that , in the Eyes of Christ, Mary is some how better than everyone else! Is this an accurate understanding? I mean does the Roman Catholic Church teach that when I stand before Chirst I am less loved than Mary? or the Saints? or the Pope? or any one else?

Seeking Answers

With the Love of Christ,

Br. Thomas

 

[E.E.N.S]

Br. Thomas, I only have one question (and it is the same question that I asked myself about 6 years ago), who decides what is “essential?”

I am in no place to decide what is essential and what is not, however the Bride of Christ, the Church is, and so in the words of Our Lord, I “take it to the Chruch.” (Remember, “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven…”)

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

revbrothomas:
I greet you as my fellow traveller on this road!
Yes, the Marian doctrines are a bit troubling to me as well. I am beginning to accept the idea that asking those in Heaven (including Mary) to pray for me is acceptable, but I still struggle with the idea that somehow Mary can persuade God to grant a prayer on my behalf that He would not have answered had I asked Him directly. At any rate, my understanding is that praying to Mary is not required for salvation, though it is certainly beneficial to those who do it.

God Bless!

 

[Will]

revbrothomas:

Yes my big hang up right now are the “Marian Doctrines” Why? not because they have not been presented in a “rational” way; because they have. But because they having nothing to do with my salvation. :

Having been a Catholic all my life. Let me ask this.
What do the Marian Doctrines have to do with praying to Mary?
I mean you can be a Good Catholic all you life and never say a rosery or any prayer to any saint for that matter. (Well there is the litinay of the saints, but that is not the point ). All of that stuff is priviate devotion. Not Required by the church.
Now you do have to believe the 4 Marian dogmas(Truths) but that is it. That is what makes the Church Catholic. There are many allowed traditions as long as they don’t violate the few dogmas we have. The rest is up for Grabs. I just don’t get how people see the Church as having a lot of rules. There really are not that many defined dogmas. And a good portion of them don’t say what to believe, as much as what not too.

Back to the point:
So exactly what is your hang up with them? If as you say you have had them explained in a rational way.

 

[reen12]

Hi, Mickey,

quote: Mickey

Do you think that some people consider themselves to be sheep–and then one day they look in the mirror and see a goat! :bigyikes:

It was probably all of that mirror gazing that got them
“goat” status to begin with.

Christ referred to separating the sheep from the goats, right?
Further, He told all that He would say to these people:
“Depart from Me, I never knew you.”

These two “groups” are one and the same, I think.
Christ says, to these “goats”, who thought they were sheep:

I was hungry, and you fed Me not,
A stranger, and you did not welcome Me…

A sheep listens to the Shepherd, huh?
A sheep looks to what the Shepherd commanded,
and does try h/her best to fulfill those commands,
with God’s grace and with the Shepherd at h/her side,
as this sheep goes about doing justice, loving
mercy, giving the occasional bleat of thanks.

What it comes down to, in my conscience, is the
issue of “certainty” or blessed assurance.

“Come to Me, all you who are heavily burdened,
and I will give you rest.”
“My peace I give you, not as the world gives…”

These two sentences, alone, are incommensurate
with the image of a mirror-gazing sheep, fretting that
h/she might *really *be a goat!

Blessed assurance brings peace of heart and mind,
and rest to the soul.

Best regards, Mickey,

Maureen

 

[scylla]

As a Catholic we usually don’t spend much time worrying about all the different aspects of the faith. We are not required to do all this stuff…
But anytime I need something more, I need additional prayer, I need clarification, I need a little more spirituality, I need a retreat or something to enrich me, the Church is there. It is like a huge treasure chest, you can keep coming to it for better understanding and for a stronger faith.

Your real only obligation is going to Church on Sunday, believing the truth and living a Christian life. It is very simple, it just has structure to maintain the truth and not veer off.

I would suggest trying to watch some Father Benedict Groeschel, he is a terrific witness to the simplicity and beauty of the faith.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[reen12]

Dear Sherlock,

quote: Sherlock

…you come here to disparage the use of reason…

When that reasoning becomes the ding an sich,
the “thing, in itself”, you bet I do, Sherlock.

I have a degree, with honors, in philosophy,
and received the Departmental Award in same, in
the year of my graduation.

I hope the above dispels any thought that I am
uninterested in rational thought, per se.

I’ve used the exaggerated imagery of the sheep, to
try to convey that there is a whole other way of
being with Christ, than that offered by what I
hold to be, the hyper-rational approach of RCC
theology.

I take it, from your posts, that you are not appreciative
of my views.

That’s OK. My effort was to reach out to those
who were also raised with the hyper-rational approach
to faith.

Best to you, Sherlock,

reen12

 

[Sherlock]

Reen,

You wrote: “When that reasoning becomes the ding an sich,
the “thing, in itself”, you bet I do, Sherlock.”

But I too oppose that, and said so in an earlier post. No one posting on this thread has ever suggested that reason should be the “thing, in itself”. Straw-man argument, Reen.

You wrote: “I have a degree, with honors, in philosophy,
and received the Departmental Award in same, in
the year of my graduation.
I hope the above dispels any thought that I am
uninterested in rational thought, per se.”

No, it does not dispel that thought. I have very little respect for what is taught in colleges and universities these days—critical thinking is in short supply, and at times the universities seem to be the place where the last vestiges of common sense and logic are stripped from people. Sorry, but I have to base my estimation of your regard for reason solely upon your posts: degrees don’t impress me, and, in fact, when someone trots them out to bolster their position instead of forming an effective argument that stands or falls on its own merits, then I am left to suspect that the person can’t state their postion effectively.

You wrote: “I’ve used the exaggerated imagery of the sheep, to
try to convey that there is a whole other way of
being with Christ, than that offered by what I
hold to be, the hyper-rational approach of RCC
theology.”

Hyper-rational to YOU. Maybe some Catholic theology is over your head, or you simply aren’t interested in theology. That’s fine; that’s why there are many Charismatic Catholic movements for people like you who don’t care for such things. But don’t dare tell me, in your juridical manner, that it’s an “either/or” deal—if people aren’t like you, why, then they’re hyper-rational!

You wrote: “I take it, from your posts, that you are not appreciative
of my views.”

You’re right. I don’t care for people separating faith and reason, especially when they then attack the straw-man of “hyper-rationalism”, as if anyone who appreciates the God-given gift of reason must, necessarily, be elevating it to an unacceptable level. No one has done that on this thread, at least as far as I can see. If you can’t understand what is being said, that doesn’t mean that those who are saying it are necessarily in the wrong. If you don’t like discussing theology, fine—just don’t tell me that those that do are less in love with Jesus than you are.