Struggling with my Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pope_Noah_I
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I considered the religious life for quite a while but realized that I am called to the married life. That being said, I do not find it offensive when people say that celibacy is the higher calling, because it is. Jesus says it, St. Paul says it, the Church has always taught it. Some people took that to the extreme though, thinking that only holy people remain celibate, and the not-so-holy get married. That extreme is wrong, of course. There are unholy priests and religious and saintly married people.

*Protestants *are not a threat, you’re right. Protestantism is though, and can’t be ignored as such.
I agree that the call to the Priesthood is one of distinct and most significant sacrifice. Furthermore, it is a calling with special rank and dignity because they represent Christ and act in the name of the Church in unique and special ways. But, I would like to see documentation that Paul, Christ and the Church all taught it was “superior” or “higher”. If one were to read the Catechism and the encyclical I reference below, the husband, father, wife, mother, children, and family unit seperately and as a unit is also a calling of special rank, dignity called to represent themselves as Christ to the world. In fact, the encyclical talks about the unique mission of the laity/family to be a secular/non-clerical evangelists distinct from the clergy.

From the Catechism:

1534 Two other sacraments, Holy Orders and Matrimony, are directed towards the salvation of others; if they contribute as well to personal salvation, it is through service to others that they do so. They confer a particular mission in the Church and serve to build up the People of God.

1535 Through these sacraments those already consecrated by Baptism and Confirmation1 for the common priesthood of all the faithful can receive particular consecrations. Those who receive the sacrament of Holy Orders are consecrated in Christ’s name “to feed the Church by the word and grace of God.” On their part, “Christian spouses are fortified and, as it were, consecrated for the duties and dignity of their state by a special sacrament.”

1620
Both the sacrament of Matrimony and virginity for the Kingdom of God come from the Lord himself. It is he who gives them meaning and grants them the grace which is indispensable for living them out in conformity with his will.117 Esteem of virginity for the sake of the kingdom118 and the Christian understanding of marriage are inseparable, and they reinforce each other:

Whoever denigrates marriage also diminishes the glory of virginity. Whoever praises it makes virginity more admirable and resplendent. What appears good only in comparison with evil would not be truly good. The most excellent good is something even better than what is admitted to be good. (St. John Crysostom)

As Priests are indispensable for bringing the Sacraments, the family and parents are indispensable for preaching the Gospel and building the Kingdom on Earth.

And from Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Familiaris Consortio:

. . . .the Christian family, in fact, is the first community called to announce the Gospel to the human person during growth and to bring him or her, through a progressive education and catechesis, to full human and Christian maturity.

Willed by God in the very act of creation,(3) marriage and the family are interiorly ordained to fulfillment in Christ(4) and have need of His graces in order to be healed from the wounds of sin(5) and restored to their “beginning,”(6) that is, to full understanding and the full realization of God’s plan.

Christian revelation recognizes two specific ways of realizing the vocation of the human person in its entirety, to love: marriage and virginity or celibacy. Either one is, in its own proper form, an actuation of the most profound truth of man, of his being “created in the image of God.”

Virginity or celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom of God not only does not contradict the dignity of marriage but presupposes it and confirms it. Marriage and virginity or celibacy are two ways of expressing and living the one mystery of the covenant of God with His people. When marriage is not esteemed, neither can consecrated virginity or celibacy exist; when human sexuality is not regarded as a great value given by the Creator, the renunciation of it for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven loses its meaning.
 
  1. Church’s teachings on sex. They seem so liberal. I don’t buy that post-menopausal sex is acceptable. It just reeks of gluttony to me.
As has already been pointed out, I don’t think any religion or Church condemns this. Here you have to exercise faith. Even if you don’t understand why something is, you place your faith in its truth because of God who decrees it. And God has surely not decreed otherwise, unless His decree was thwarted everywhere and for all time–and that doesn’t happen.
I also cannot believe that the Church teaches that a celibate vocation is no better than getting married.
Marriage is a Holy Sacrament. Celibacy often accompanies the Sacrament of Holy Orders, but it is not itself a sacrament, but rather an evangelical counsel. Both are different vocations with their own sacrifices and services to God and the Church. However, the fact that the Latin Church continues to uphold the discipline of clerical celibacy shows the great value she places on it.
  1. The ability of one man to change over 1,000 years of tradition. Of course I am referring to Paul VI and the Novus Ordo.
No liturgies we have today were written by the Apostles. They all have been changed by human beings over time. With the Jewish Temple destroyed, you’ll be hard-pressed to find a liturgy directly ordained by God alone.
All I need to know is that Protestants were very involved in making it. Since when does God’s Church call in the heretics to help reform our Liturgy? I guess we came a long way from Pius IX refusing to add St. Joseph to the Canon. What did Pio Nono say? Something along the lines of, “I’m only the Pope.”
As has been pointed out, Protestants were invited to participate at Trent and the Orthodox were invited to participate at the First Vatican Council too.

I’m not sure where Bl. Pius IX said that, but in Omnem Sollicitudinem he affirmed the right of the Holy See to approve changes to the liturgy (and stated they can only be changed with such approval). Here he repeated what his predecessor, Gregory XVI said in Quo Gravior. This of course is simply repeating what St. Gelasius I and later the Council of Trent affirmed in this regard as well.
 
I agree that the call to the Priesthood is one of distinct and most significant sacrifice. Furthermore, it is a calling with special rank and dignity because they represent Christ and act in the name of the Church in unique and special ways. But, I would like to see documentation that Paul, Christ and the Church all taught it was “superior” or “higher”.

[/INDENT]
To use your quote from St. John C. I italicized the point I was trying to make:

Whoever denigrates marriage also diminishes the glory of virginity. Whoever praises it makes virginity more admirable and resplendent. What appears good only in comparison with evil would not be truly good. The most excellent good is something even better than what is admitted to be good.

Please also see the Gospel of St. Matthew Chapter 19 and 1 Corinthians Chapter 7, with special emphasis on verse 2. The whole chapter discusses it, but I personally think verse 2 is especially essential to the point.

The New Testament examples also: Jesus, Mary, St. John (the beloved disciple), St. John the Baptist, St. Paul. “If thou wilt be perfect…come follow me.” We can do this most perfectly without the distraction of a family. We all have a calling, but some are superior to others. It doesn’t make the person automatically better because they chose the more sacrificial path, but celibacy is a more perfect imitation of the life of Jesus. The comparison of a doctor “versus” a nurse I think might be appropriate here. They suit the same purpose but one requires more, offers more, is superior to the other. Better as people, not necessarily, but I’m sure you know what I’m getting at here.

Again, I’m not downplaying marriage in any way. Like I said, I believe that I’m called to marriage. It is a sacrament, after all.
 
Why would you ever leave the One, True Church started by Christ? Do you somehow think that the Church can err in matters of doctrine?
How do you know that the One, True Church does not truly subsist in the Holy Orthodox Church? (honest question)
 
Eastern Orthodoxy sounds better every day…
Noah remember the Footprints in the Sand…
…The Lord replied, “My precious, precious child, I love you and I would never leave you. During your times of trial and suffering, when you see only one set of footprints in the sand it was then that I carried you.”

D.
 
Eastern Orthodoxy sounds better every day…
switching from the RC to EC because it suits you better.

how is that different from a cafeteria Catholic? you just do it in more archaic realms.

you’re not struggling with Catholicism, you’re struggling with not having things your way. The Church doesn’t change for liberals and traditionalists alike. That is one of many reasons I love her.
 
How do you know that the One, True Church does not truly subsist in the Holy Orthodox Church? (honest question)
maybe you should jot down the abuses you see and tack your changes onto the door of your local Cathedral…
 
switching from the RC to EC because it suits you better.

how is that different from a cafeteria Catholic? you just do it in more archaic realms.

you’re not struggling with Catholicism, you’re struggling with not having things your way. The Church doesn’t change for liberals and traditionalists alike. That is one of many reasons I love her.
That seems to be the case. I don’t see why he could just switch from Latin Rite to Eastern Rite. The Liturgy is the same except the Eastern Rite is in union with the Pope in Rome.
 
switching from the RC to EC because it suits you better.

how is that different from a cafeteria Catholic? you just do it in more archaic realms.

you’re not struggling with Catholicism, you’re struggling with not having things your way. The Church doesn’t change for liberals and traditionalists alike. That is one of many reasons I love her.
I’m having a struggle within my soul, and you’re accusing me of being a cafeteria Catholic. When my heart screams something, and the Church fathers seem to support it, and then I see that it is not taught anymore in Rome, while it is taught in Orthodoxy, I need an explanation. And you call me a cafeteria Catholic. Thank you, sir.
 
Eastern Orthodoxy sounds better every day…
From what I understand, Eastern Orthodoxy permits married couples to use barrier methods, and permits priests to marry. So why would they be a better fit in terms of your quandries? :confused:
 
I’m having a struggle within my soul, and you’re accusing me of being a cafeteria Catholic. When my heart screams something, and the Church fathers seem to support it, and then I see that it is not taught anymore in Rome, while it is taught in Orthodoxy, I need an explanation. And you give me **** about being a cafeteria catholic. Thank you, sir.
you’re not having a struggle with the Church. The struggle is in your own thinking. The Roman Catholic Church has the full deposit of Faith, the ENTIRE truth of Christ as revealed in both Tradition and Doctrine.

What are you looking for that is more complete than that?

I’d love to hear how the Roman Catholic Church has failed you, because she hasn’t.

There is no explanation of the question you asked. It is a bad conjecture with a flawed premise.

This should be discussed, i might add, with a Priest.
 
you’re not having a struggle with the Church. The struggle is in your own thinking. The Roman Catholic Church has the full deposit of Faith, the ENTIRE truth of Christ as revealed in both Tradition and Doctrine.

Perhaps. However, I see some of these teachings, and I’m taken aback. Somehow, I doubt these things would go over so well with, say, St. Augustine.
What are you looking for that is more complete than that?

I’m looking to see if the Catholic Church is just that.
I’d love to hear how the Roman Catholic Church has failed you, because she hasn’t.

I never said It did.

There is no explanation of the question you asked. It is a bad conjecture with a flawed premise.

Could you elaborate?

This should be discussed, i might add, with a Priest.

Thank you for your concern. 🙂
 
you’re not having a struggle with the Church. The struggle is in your own thinking. The Roman Catholic Church has the full deposit of Faith, the ENTIRE truth of Christ as revealed in both Tradition and Doctrine.

What are you looking for that is more complete than that?

I’d love to hear how the Roman Catholic Church has failed you, because she hasn’t.

There is no explanation of the question you asked. It is a bad conjecture with a flawed premise.

This should be discussed, i might add, with a Priest.
You’re perceiving his post as an attack. He said he’s struggling. Answers to questions might be more helpful.
 
I’m having a struggle within my soul, and you’re accusing me of being a cafeteria Catholic. When my heart screams something, and the Church fathers seem to support it, and then I see that it is not taught anymore in Rome, while it is taught in Orthodoxy, I need an explanation. And you call me a cafeteria Catholic. Thank you, sir.
Noah, in your original post you reference the following “dissents” with the Catholic Church (Church you’d have died for just a few weeks ago):


  1. *]You disagree with post-menepausal sex
    *]You think that a celebate vocation is better than marriage.
    *]You disagree with the Pope’s Authority to institute the Novus Ordo Mass. I don’t know what part of it you disagree or if it is it in total.
    *]You justify your opposition to the NO because non-Catholics were invited to the Vatican II Council.
    *]I don’t even know what your comment on Pius IX refusing to add St. Joseph to the Canon.

    And then you conclude your OP with “I’m probably wrong, but can anyone help me with these?”

    People have thoughtfully addressed all of these issues from a Catholic perspective (except maybe the St. Joseph question which I don’t understand).

    You have never responded to any of their points. But you then say that you find orthodoxy as a better alternative without regard to the fact that they allow married priests, some contraception, and post-menopausal sex.

    Your dissent and willingness to leave the Church is more than “cafeteria Catholic” as they don’t threaten to leave the Church. Furthermore, the issues on which you are leaving appear extremely Protestant church shopping.

    You don’t like the liturgy instituted before you were born.
    You don’t like that they allow non-Catholics to observe a Council so you will join another Church.
    You think the Church is more liberal on sexual matters so you will join one that allows what you abhor and more.

    Thechrysmyster is correct. You have a problem with your thinking and you need to get yourself to a Priest, into prayer, and dedicate your will to submit. Your big fat ego is overwhelming your faith, your mind, and your soul.
 
I’m having a struggle within my soul, and you’re accusing me of being a cafeteria Catholic. When my heart screams something, and the Church fathers seem to support it, and then I see that it is not taught anymore in Rome, while it is taught in Orthodoxy, I need an explanation. And you call me a cafeteria Catholic. Thank you, sir.
So the Eastern Orthodox do not allow sex between married couples once the wife has entered menopause?

And as others have noted, many times God has worked miracles of life with couples where the woman was post menopausal, how would Isaac have been born to Abraham and Sarah if they followed your understanding of marriage?

How would have heralded the Messiah and baptized Jesus in the Jordan if Elizabeth had not given birth to John the Baptist?

As for changes to practice and disciplines [results of various Popes and Councils - Vatican II], the church has always been in some form of change…not to core faith, doctines and morality…but in how it lives out that faith…Now granted the church may be slower or faster at times…take language…originally Hebrew and Aramaic were the comon tongue which rather quickly moved to the Greek [a more universally used language especially amoung the Gentile converts]. As more time progressed and the Church expanded in the “Roman” world the common language of the Empire was Latin…this language held sway as the world [geographically speaking] exapanded.

You know at a point before the ‘discovery’ of the New World, Christianity had believed that it had expanded to the four corners and to all peoples…Imagine the surpirse to find twice as much “World” and half again as many people, cultures and languages…

So Latin held sway but times and technology change as well…With your thinking, you would require that Holy Scriptures only be written [long hand] on parchment [or skins] in Latin [as the official language]…never on a printing press nor in english, spanish, tamil, etc. because for 1500 years that is the only method by which thse Sacred Texts had been produced…

And if the Church does not adhere to the traditions that you hold sacrasanct…🤷
 
From what I understand, Eastern Orthodoxy permits married couples to use barrier methods, and permits priests to marry. So why would they be a better fit in terms of your quandries? :confused:
An Orthodox Spiritual Father may on rare occasion allow a couple to use NFP or another barrier method only in the most extreme of cases: like possible death. Otherwise, the Orthodox Church as a whole deems all forms of trying to control a couples fertility as forbidden including NFP. Just as eating when you are not physically hungry is gluttony so is having sex without being open to possible new life and waiting to only have sex when you are relatively sure you will not pro-create lust. Both are considered sins by the Orthodox Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top