Stay Catholic or change religions?

[CMatt25]

Jesus promised that His Church could never fail, until the end of time, and that it would be a world-wide, visible, authoritative organization.

If the present-day Catholic Church is not the one, then can you please point out which one it is, and show how the authority of Christ was passed in an unbroken line through every generation to it? Thanks!!

Of course His Church will prevail against the gates. But ya know some believe the line was broken due to a straying line. And then I can’t because I’m not Episcopalian but I do know they believe they are in the line even though the CC says they’re not. So maybe someone from TEC could explain how they believe it to you. Not that you’ll care though I know since you only listen to what the CC tells you about itself.

 

[CMatt25]

CMAT25

Do I need to start praying that your parish starts offering coffee and dougnuts?

Well maybe alternating wks bagels then doughnuts for a start at least.

 

[CMatt25]

You are not by any means the first person to come along and think that your ideas are better than the Apostles.

I had an idea, though when I was praying for you today. What about founding a new order of Catholics? We could name it after Hymenaeus! CMatt, of the Hymenaen Order!

Hello again Guan, how was your day? I hope well. Thank you for your prayers. I thought you knew me better though! You know where we might disagree I don’t necessarily believe my beliefs are or are not any more 100% absolutely certain truth than yours regarding the Apostles! Remember. Unity in Him! Peace.

 

[guanophore]

Well, getting mad over changing money is a bit different than eating a piece of toast before mass. That’s just how I feel. Is there something Biblical stating that he would want us to fast before going to mass and receiving the body of Christ?

Both are a form of failing to respect the presence of God.

The fasting discipline is to remind us to hunger and thirst for Him. Can you imagine how much holier we would be if we wanted Christ in us as much as we wanted that piece of toast?

Well, I do understand fasting before communion is a respect thing, but I don’t think it leads to condemnation. I guess I am just ignorant about the Catholic Church,

Many of us were poorly catechized. There is nothing wrong with not knowing things. It is wrong if we do not correct that when necessary.

What leads to condemnation is when we don’t have our flesh in subjection to the Spirit.

I may acknowledge the basis of what Christianity is all about, Apostolic Succession, etc, but to say those who don’t follow the CC (but another denomination) are not being true to Christ, I just don’t see that, sorry. I guess I am just yet another, cafeteria Catholic.

Good news, laneo. This is a condition that can be treated and cured!

 

[guanophore]

Copies of my membership papers dated both 1964 and 2009 say I was baptized according to the rite of the ROMAN Catholic Church. On the reverse sisde of one of them it even notes my First Communion and my Confirmation.

Indeed, as a member of the Roman rite (Latin) you are baptized according to that custom. If you had been in an Eastern Rite, then it would have been done according to that Rite.

The Catholic Church is not Roman. The Roman (Latin) Rite is only one of 23 Rites. IT happens to be the largest, and the most common in the West.

Laneo, now it’s you who better be careful or you might have to add an adjective to your ID to remain a Catholic!

I thought we were in agreement that one remains a Catholic?

What the adjectives do is distinguish the Catholic! Cafeteria Catholic is very appropriate.

Of course His Church will prevail against the gates. But ya know some believe the line was broken due to a straying line.

Yes, that is the prevaling Protestant perception. It is invalid, though. It is like saying that the office of the President is “broken” because some of the presidents have had bad behavior. The continuity is in the office, not in the person.

And then I can't because I'm not Episcopalian but I do know they believe they are in the line even though the CC says they're not.

If the line is broken, what good is that?

It is like calling oneself Catholic when one has excommunicated oneself by rejecting the teaching of the Church!

So maybe someone from TEC could explain how they believe it to you. Not that you’ll care though I know since you only listen to what the CC tells you about itself.

This is an inaccurate and insulting comment. If we were not willing to listen to all the calumnies that you and others bring against our faith, we would not BE here! Some of us are paying so that you will have the freedom to post these inaccuracies about our faith! I am a forum supporter so that you have a venue to insult me like you just did.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t doubt that the early Christians called themselves the Catholic Church. What I don’t believe is that today’s Roman Catholic Church is heir to any special authority from Jesus or the Apostles; i.e. the doctrine of Apostolic Succession.

When do you think the authority got 'lost" and why?

Through the ability to compel compliance with their will.

Not necessarily. Some of them can, but it is more a matter of their position of authority. It is the position that gives them the privilege to compel compliance (although it is not always possible). For example, our president does not have the ability (apparently) to compel BP to stop leaking oil into the gulf, or to clean up what is there.

Yes, I agree with all that.

This will greately improve the progress we can make on the authority issue.

I do not believe in that succession.  I know the Church would very much like me to - the craving for power and authority is inherent in man - but I do not believe that the present-day Roman Catholic Church has in fact inherited the authority it claims for itself.

It may be that a study of history is in order. Authority comes from God. It cannot be “claimed for oneself”.

the Catholic Church is not “Roman”, and the authority is not “inherited”, but passed through the laying on of hands.

I think we are in agreement that abuse of authority does not abrogate authority, are we not? do you remember what Jesus taught about the Pharisees that were in authority in His day?

I don’t believe there is one such church, nor is one needed.

If one was not needed, why would Jesus have established it, and promised to keep it until the end of the age? Surely you don’t think he did something unnecessary?

Peter passed away a few years ago.

Excellent point, and the exact reason that he had to pass his authority on to his successor.

 

[CMatt25]

Indeed, as a member of the Roman rite (Latin) you are baptized according to that custom. If you had been in an Eastern Rite, then it would have been done according to that Rite.

The Catholic Church is not Roman. The Roman (Latin) Rite is only one of 23 Rites. IT happens to be the largest, and the most common in the West.

Yes, that is the prevaling Protestant perception. It is invalid, though. It is like saying that the office of the President is “broken” because some of the presidents have had bad behavior. The continuity is in the office, not in the person.

If the line is broken, what good is that?

This is an inaccurate and insulting comment. If we were not willing to listen to all the calumnies that you and others bring against our faith, we would not BE here! Some of us are paying so that you will have the freedom to post these inaccuracies about our faith! I am a forum supporter so that you have a venue to insult me like you just did.

Guan, why then do my papers not say I was baptized according to the Roman rite of the Catholic Church but instead actually say the Roman Catholic Church?

I’m not about to compare the realm of God with something secular like the office of the Presidency. Apples and oranges.

Guan, but the line isn’t broken if you were Episcopalian. TEC is not included in the line to you because you believe what you are told by the CC about them not being in the line. But if you were Episcopalian then you maybe would believe they are in the line of apostolic succession. Now is when we might need CARV or Contarini to explain it better. But I know an Episcopalian priest once explained to me how Roman Catholics can be received into TEC because we are both confirmed in the apostolic succession by bishops. I know that is not what you believe but it is what they believe.

And I’m sorry but I don’t know what you were so offended by. First off I was responding to something Jmcrae had said. But you do only listen to and accept what the CC teaches you, right? What was so offensive about that? Perhaps you perceived a tone to my post which certainly was unintended. And if you did that, then I am sorry. It happens sometimes on internet forums like this when we can not actually hear the other person’s voice. I know you listen to what others post on the forum. You do a great job responding afterall to all you read/“listen” to!

I merely meant in responding to Jmcrae, that I didn’t think he would care what TEC says about them being in succession because he (and if you want to include yourself, then I presume you too based on what you post) only accepts what the CC says about it. You listen to and accept what the CC says. But again I apologize for any misunderstanding. Peace.

 

[guanophore]

Guan, why then do my papers not say I was baptized according to the Roman rite of the Catholic Church but instead actually say the Roman Catholic Church?

Because many of the people that design and print the certificates are not aware that the Catholic Church is not “Roman”. For centuries, the West was separated from the East by war, politics, and economics. They did not know that the Eastern Rites had even survived. The Roman Church forged ahead as if they were alone. That is why so many documents addressed to the whole Church are titled “Holy Roman Catholic Church”. It does not mean that they do not now recognize the other Rites.

I’m not about to compare the realm of God with something secular like the office of the Presidency. Apples and oranges.

The comparison is about authority, and offices. The authority of the office is not dependent upon the impeccability of the occupant.

Guan, but the line isn’t broken if you were Episcopalian. TEC is not included in the line to you because you believe what you are told by the CC about them not being in the line.

No, CM, this is a logical error. There is nothing about any of the lines of authority or succession that have anything to do with what I believe, or what I am told. The authority comes from God, and is passed through the sacrament of ordination. It has nothign to do with me.

But if you were Episcopalian then you maybe would believe they are in the line of apostolic succession.

Yes, and they may in fact be so. The Vatican is even now reconciling those who were separated in the Anglican communion. Some of the lines of succession have been recognized, and those that are uncertain are received and holy orders bestowed in case those that were received were not valid. Much like a conditional baptism.

Now is when we might need CARV to explain it better. But I know an Episcopalian priest once explained to me how Roman Catholics can be received into TEC because we are both confirmed in the apostolic succession by bishops. I know that is not what you believe but it is what they believe.

What makes you think that I don’t believe that?

And I’m sorry but I don’t know what you were so offended by. First off I was responding to something Jmcrae had said. But you do only listen to and accept what the CC teaches you, right?

No, I do not, and I find the accusation offensive. If that was all I listned to and accepted, I would not be on any of these threads, listening to anti-Catholic sentiments such as yours. You statement was that we dont “care”. I care enough to financially support your freedom to insult us here on this thread.

What was so offensive about that? Perhaps you perceived a tone to my post which certainly was unintended. And if you did that, then I am sorry. It happens sometimes on internet forums like this when we can not actually hear the other person’s voice.

I am sure you meant exactly what you said. Uncaring and not listening.

Not that you'll care though I know since you only listen to what the CC tells you about itself.

I merely meant in responding to Jmcrae, that I didn't think he would care what TEC says about them being in succession because he (and if you want to include yourself,

It is an insulting remark to make to jmcrae as well. If we did not care about what the members bring here, we would not invest our time and resources to discuss them.

then I presume you too based on what you posts) only accepts what the CC says about it. You listen to and accept what the CC says. But again I apologize for any misunderstanding. Peace.

I listen to and accept as many of the points of view as I am able to here on CAF. I seek out the non-Catholic posters because they tend to not understand or disagree with the Catholic Church, or at least what they believe is Catholic.

The assertion that anyone here “only” cares and listens to the catholic point of view is basically accusing us of bigotry.

 

[CMatt25]

Guan, ok I know you can’t speak for Jmcrae. But I’m sorry then for assuming you would not believe for instance, that The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of TEC in the US, is in apostolic succession. I just assumed you believed she was not.

I’m surprised someone in the Church hasn’t told the printers over the yrs about the Roman Catholic Church. But oh well. Have a wonderful night.

 

[guanophore]

Guan, ok I know you can’t speak for Jmcrae. But I’m sorry then for assuming you would not believe for instance, that The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of TEC in the US, is in apostolic succession. I just assumed you believed she was not.

Your post accused a lack of caring, and bigotry - refusal to listen to other points of view.

Whether I believe what is proposed is another matter. I still listen, and so does jmcrae.

The fact that I embrace the Teachings of the Church does not make me, or anyone else that does so, an inconsiderate bigot, as you have proposed. It is offensive,.

I’m surprised someone in the Church hasn’t told the printers over the yrs about the Roman Catholic Church. But oh well. Have a wonderful night.

The printers that serve the needs of the Roman Rite have the latitude to print their certificates according to their customs.

The Catholic Church is not “Roman”.

 

[CMatt25]

Your post accused a lack of caring, and bigotry - refusal to listen to other points of view.

Whether I believe what is proposed is another matter. I still listen, and so does jmcrae.

The fact that I embrace the Teachings of the Church does not make me, or anyone else that does so, an inconsiderate bigot, as you have proposed. It is offensive,.
".

Guan, you can continue reading whatever you want into my post but you are absolutely mistaken. And I am not discussing this further with you beyond this because obviously you have not been listening to what I am explaining to you about it. If my words were not quite chosen in the best manner to convey to you what I meant, I have previously apologized.

But again I have said what I meant is simply this: I was talking about **in the end **you will listen to what the CC says about it and will not in the end still be caring about or listening to, ie, will not in the end accept, agree with, believe, or follow TEC’s explanation about apostolic succession if they include bishops in apostolic succession whom the CC does not. I meant nothing at all about you not being willing to care or listen at first. Just that simply in the end you will listen to the CC and not what TEC says about it. That’s it. Period.

You can keep believing whatever you want and think you know what I meant better than I myself know what I meant if you want. I have explained it to you. You can listen to me or not. I frankly don’t care at this point. But to bring bigotry into it and then to imply I was suggesting in any way, shape or form you or Jmcrae are bigots is absolutely false!

Listen and take it or leave it Guan. Period.

 

[Lapey]

I understand that is your belief. It is not mine.

Ted, it is correct to say that this opinion you state is your opinion. On the other hand, it is fact proved by history that the above staetent is fact not opinion. The current day bishops are the succesors to the first. The pope is the succesor to Peter. The Tradition and Sacred Scripture together is the Word of God made flesh. The Catholic Church is the holder of this deposit of faith in it’s fulness. Jesus is the head of this church and we are His body.

To not see this is to ignore history and the Early Church Fatherrs.

 

[Zadkiel]

You are to be commended for your spiritual search, Esdra. But, you are not only writing what you found out for yourself. You are giving others here advice on how to leave the Catholic Church. This is a clear violation of the forum rules.

He doesn’t…
He just wanted her to be open. It’s similar like my dad told me that there are also other Christians than the Catholics and that they are equally true. He even showed me some (Lutheran Evangelical and Serbian Orthodox).

Zadkiel

 

[Zadkiel]

Don’t kid yourself…that’s exactly what you seem to be trying to do. By saying that if you raised your kids Catholic that eventually they wouldn’t have any faith in Christ at all.

But actually this is what had happened to me…
I was also not really Catholic risen (=catechised)…
My only luck was that I was that fascinated from Jesus of Nazareth that I never stopped believing in Him (because we have often talked about Jesus and the Holy Bible in our family - In fact you could even say, although both parents are Catholics, I was more risen as a protestant!)
And that I am very spiritual and wake person.

Seriously…if I saw a post that was “stay episcipalian or change religions” I sure won’t go on there and BLAST your faith…

Do you really think that an episcopolean would ask in a Catholic Forum if he should stay E., or change religions?
In my opinion this is quite unlikely. Why should he ask in a Catholic Forum, where it is clear that there are mainly Catholics, if he should stay E. or not? I mean the answer he will most definitely hear is that he should become Catholic?!

Zadkiel

 

[guanophore]

Guan, you can continue reading whatever you want into my post but you are absolutely mistaken. And I am not discussing this further with you beyond this because obviously you have not been listening to what I am explaining to you about it. If my words were not quite chosen in the best manner to convey to you what I meant, I have previously apologized.

But again I have said what I meant is simply this: I was talking about **in the end **you will listen to what the CC says about it and will not in the end still be caring about or listening to, ie, will not in the end accept, agree with, believe, or follow TEC’s explanation about apostolic succession if they include bishops in apostolic succession whom the CC does not. I meant nothing at all about you not being willing to care or listen at first. Just that simply in the end you will listen to the CC and not what TEC says about it. That’s it. Period.

There is an essential difference between caring for people, and listening to them, and agreeing that their behavior is ok, or that it is ok for me to follow their example. Catholics have an obligation to live by all that the Church believes and teaches. We are NOT to be obedient at the expense of charity(caring about and listening to others). Yet our obligation to charity does not include embracing heresies and disobedience to the authority appointed by Christ. It is not loving to confirm others in error by approving wrongdoing.

Our commitment to our faith does not equate to uncharitable behavior. jmcrae is one of the most educated, committed, and charitable Catholics you will find on CAF or off it. To accuse such a person of not caring and not listening because it is not permitted to embrace disobedience is offensive.

It is also untrue that the Church is not “listening” to the needs of our separated brethren, especially in the course of reconciliaton. The Church is not permitted to abandon the Deposit of faith entrusted to her by the Apostles. It does not mean she does not listen or care.

 You can keep believing whatever you want and think you know what I meant better than I myself know what I meant if you want.  I have explained it to you.  You can listen to me or not.  I frankly don't care at this point.

I think you made this sentiment clear at the outset. The difference is that your posts are now containing baseless and hurful accusations toward Catholics because they can’t agree with your perspective. For us, what you are presenting constitutes “a different gospel” than the one we received, and if we are to embrace it, then we will be accursed.

That does not mean we do not care about what you say (or what the TEC says) and that we don’t listen. If caring and listening in your mind must equate to agreement and embracing your beliefs, then you have a seriousl problem. You also will not feel very cared about by Catholics who are committed to the faith.

But to bring bigotry into it and then to imply I was suggesting in any way, shape or form you or Jmcrae are bigots is absolutely false!

It would be an act of bigotry to refuse to care about or listen to people just because they see things from a different point of view.

Listen and take it or leave it Guan. :shrug:  Period.

I accept your anti-Catholic sentiments, CM, though it saddens me that you have them. Jesus said that the mouth speaks that which fills the heart. Perhaps that applies to keyboards as well.

 

[guanophore]

He doesn’t…
He just wanted her to be open. It’s similar like my dad told me that there are also other Christians than the Catholics and that they are equally true. He even showed me some (Lutheran Evangelical and Serbian Orthodox).

Zadkiel

With all due respect to your father, this is misinformation. I am sure he is sincere in his beliefs, but every denomination that has left Catholicism defines itself by which part of the Catholic faith they reject. In removing parts of the Apostolic Gospel, each are missing some parts of the Truth. Therefore, they are not “equally true”.

But actually this is what had happened to me…
I was also not really Catholic risen (=catechised)…
My only luck was that I was that fascinated from Jesus of Nazareth that I never stopped believing in Him (because we have often talked about Jesus and the Holy Bible in our family - In fact you could even say, although both parents are Catholics, I was more risen as a protestant!)
And that I am very spiritual and wake person.

This hunger is part of the grace of your baptism. It is too bad your parents failed in their vows at your baptism, and were unable to raise you in the faith to which you are baptized.

Do you really think that an episcopolean would ask in a Catholic Forum if he should stay E., or change religions?
In my opinion this is quite unlikely. Why should he ask in a Catholic Forum, where it is clear that there are mainly Catholics, if he should stay E. or not? I mean the answer he will most definitely hear is that he should become Catholic?!

Zadkiel

Yes. I think that should be assumed at the outset.

I think it is clear the OP has unresolved issues about leaving the CC.

 

[qui_est_ce]

CMatt is confused, as is TedDC and Laneo. But it is good they are here and actively responding.

It is very painful to see CMatt’s and Laneo’s casual attitude toward the body of Christ. When I am in the presence of an important person whom I admire, I stand in awe, as in, “I can’t believe I am here seeing this person in person!!”

But they are here. That’s a very good thing.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Was it caffeinated? Maybe it was the caffeine.

No, I was thinking about how I had finally made my 9 First Fridays. When I reviewed the promises of the Sacred Heart, the words “receive worthily” kept popping into my mind. Was I receiving worthily, or was it just something I did. This thought nagged at me for months. I came to have greater reverence, and now only receive on the tongue and fast.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Well if that’s all you want to know… yes.

Why do you believe in the Real Presence?

 

[qui_est_ce]

You do realize that was about 8 decades after Jesus resurrected I’m sure.

That’s what he wrote 8 decades later. He was a student of St. John the Apostle. What is your cut-off date for believing what you believe? Would you say St. Augustin was too far removed to have valid points regarding Christ? What about St. Jerome and Pope St. Damasius II regarding the codex in the 4th century? Too removed?