The church is to complicated?

[DavidFilmer]

I believe the Code of Cannon Law has 1,752 rules/laws (or around that number). Certainly, not less then what the Jewish religion had!

And, yet, not ONE of those Canons is expected to be known to the typical Catholic layman. Canon Law is for Canon Lawyers, Bishops, Priests, and Religious - but NOT the general Catholic laity. Most Catholic laymen have never read even a single Canon (people on this Forum excluded), nor are they EVER expected to (it’s not even recommended).

I bought my Code of Canon Law in book form (remember books?) 20 years ago, from a Catholic bookstore which is adjacent to the Basilica of my Archdiocese. No edition of Canon Law was ever kept in-stock - it had to be ordered. It took three weeks for it to arrive.

 

[slh3016]

I’ve been talking to a Baptist raised friend about Catholicism for a while now and one thing that seems to be keeping them from attending mass with me is that they say Catholics and mass has too many rules and it takes away from focusing on God. She has also supplamented this statment by using a bible reference to where Jesus said he came to do away with all the rules and that religion is supposed to be easy. I’m not exactly sure what book or verse she is referring to as she can’t remember either. I don’t really know how to tackle this one and was hoping some of you wondorfully bright people could give me some advice.

I totally get where your friend is coming from because I, too, was raised Baptist, and have been attending a non-denominational “Bible Church” for a long time. HOWEVER, for the last couple of years, my eyes have slowly been opened to the fact that a charismatic preacher, inspiring sermon, and lively music DOES NOT always equal worshiping God nor does it always equal not worshiping God. Also, the Catholic way of life is a very different mindset from a Protestant and requires a reprogramming of one’s thought processes (which will open your eyes to many more glorious and beautiful truths).

Also, once the Catholic church was on my radar, I began to pay more attention to what was really going on around me every time I went to church. I was listening more astutely to the words of the music and sermons and MOST times, I walk away with the feeling that while we had maintained the appearance of “worship”, most songs I’d just sang focused more on ME than on God. For instance, “Thank you God for what you’ve done for ME” or “Help ME…” instead of more rightly focusing on God with words such as “YOU are holy”, “YOU are worthy”, etc.

I finally got the nerve to attend a Catholic mass a few weeks ago and immediately noticed the difference. Instead of the sermon and music being the focus, God was in everything from the readings to the songs to the Eucharist. It was beautiful and I can’t wait to go back with my husband.

To get your friend started, though, because attending Mass is intimidating, would she listen to anything regarding Catholicism. I find Scott Hahn’s lectures very compelling, especially “The Fourth Cup.”

 

[Jon_S_1]

I totally get where your friend is coming from because I, too, was raised Baptist, and have been attending a non-denominational “Bible Church” for a long time. HOWEVER, for the last couple of years, my eyes have slowly been opened to the fact that a charismatic preacher, inspiring sermon, and lively music DOES NOT always equal worshiping God nor does it always equal not worshiping God. Also, the Catholic way of life is a very different mindset from a Protestant and requires a reprogramming of one’s thought processes (which will open your eyes to many more glorious and beautiful truths).

Also, once the Catholic church was on my radar, I began to pay more attention to what was really going on around me every time I went to church. I was listening more astutely to the words of the music and sermons and MOST times, I walk away with the feeling that while we had maintained the appearance of “worship”, most songs I’d just sang focused more on ME than on God. For instance, “Thank you God for what you’ve done for ME” or “Help ME…” instead of more rightly focusing on God with words such as “YOU are holy”, “YOU are worthy”, etc.

I finally got the nerve to attend a Catholic mass a few weeks ago and immediately noticed the difference. Instead of the sermon and music being the focus, God was in everything from the readings to the songs to the Eucharist. It was beautiful and I can’t wait to go back with my husband.

To get your friend started, though, because attending Mass is intimidating, would she listen to anything regarding Catholicism. I find Scott Hahn’s lectures very compelling, especially “The Fourth Cup.”

Welcome to the Church!

My experience was very similar to yours. I think you will find more and more richness as you go.

I also recommend anything by Fr Barron at wordonfire.org

 

[BlueKnight]

I would read some of Patrick Madrid’s works. He is an apologetist who is both humble and kind in his explanations, and erudite.

My thoughts are the Catholic Church has it’s complexities, dogmhas, and theologies, but to be honest, it is far less complex then the Baptists and Protestants because there is only 1 Catholic church, whereas there are thousands upon thousands of different protestant denominations with so many different views on things.

like Patrick says, the only church you can trace back hundreds of years back to the apostles is the Catholic church.

I think as a beginner in the Catholic faith, start with what you find is beautiful and meaningful to you, like the sacraments, then go out from there.

The thing that always grabs a protestant to the Catholic faith is the Eucharist.

BK

 

[steve_b]

I’ve been talking to a Baptist raised friend about Catholicism for a while now and one thing that seems to be keeping them from attending mass with me is that they say Catholics and mass has too many rules and it takes away from focusing on God.

So IOW bottomline she is saying

Mass ≠ focus on God ?

Share with her the following and see if this link produces a discussion. #4

As an aside, don’t let anyone buffalo you into thinkingthey know how to focus on God OR scripture and you don’t. The Catholic Church has been here from the beginning #34 . And Re: NT Scripture, It was written in by and for the Catholic Church and ALL the books (OT & NT) were collected and canonized by the Catholic Church. The canon we have today (OT & NT) is the canon Pope Damasus I decreed at the council of Rome in 382 #208 ]. That means for almost the first 400 years, there was no bible.

Also discuss the following with her. John 6:53-69 . Ask the question, is that a suggestion from Jesus or a command? No protestant group no matter the stripe, (i.e. it doesn’t matter what name they go by) has any capability within any of their groups to provide the Eucharist. They can’t because they have no valid ordinations. Nor can they as protestants just walk off the street and receive the Eucharist at a Catholic mass, without huge consequence to their soul.
k:

She has also supplamented this statment by using a bible reference to where Jesus said he came to do away with all the rules and that religion is supposed to be easy.

What’s the quote?
k:

I’m not exactly sure what book or verse she is referring to as she can’t remember either.

It ain’t there. It’s a bluff. Don’t let anyone do that to you. Insist on evidence properly referenced. And don’t be a punching bag either for anyone. Baptists were invented by John Smyth. britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/550221/John-Smyth . Ask her, who gave Smyth the right to contradict scripture, causing further division, by making up his own religion? Smyth broke from the Anglicans, and the Anglicans broke from the Chair of Peter, the Church of Rome. That division my friend is condemned activity, explained as follows.

open up the following links

Romans 16:17-20 , Galatians 5:19-21 , διχοστασίαςdichostasia* =* division / dissension / factions /sedition, that same Greek word is used in both Rom 16:17. And Gal 5:19… the consequences for one who dies in that sin, i.e. they leave the Catholic Church, they will not inherit heaven. [Gal 5:21] i.e. they go to hell

Key point here, there is NO expiration date to that warning or consequence on division from the Catholic Church.

open up the internal links in #34 you’ll see from the beginning the Church is the Catholic Church and where the following teaching “outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation” comes from. The evidence is there, and has been provided all properly referenced in links so it is easy to access

So maybe you need to turn the tables, and FIRST address with your friend,

• the consequences “FROM SCRIPTURE” on one’s soul, for division from Our Lord’s Church.
• Which He wants perfect unity in John 17:20-23 ,
• and the Holy Spirit only wants what Jesus wants John 16:12-15, so there is no way Jesus or the HS would EVER give confusing messages from each other, Nor divide the Catholic Church in ANY way at ANY time in history
• Point out that Protestantism got started in the 16th century as a rebellion against the Catholic Church. A condemned activity as you can show.

So, if one is condemned for their division or for being in division from Our Lord’s Church, seems to me that fault needs to be addresses, and fixed FIRST.
k:

I don’t really know how to tackle this one and was hoping some of you wondorfully bright people could give me some advice.

I’m just thinking outloud with you on these ideas. You know best how to dialogue and address ideas and issues with your friend.

As a suggestion, If it was me, at this point, I wouldn’t keep inviting her to mass. She is too green in the knowledge she needs, and too closed minded to even appreciate what’s going on at mass. Get her up to speed first, then invite her.

prayers ascending

 

[DavidFilmer]

NOOOO. It is SO simple!

Salvation is simple. We are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism and by nothing else CCC 1263], (Our Baptismal Grace is renewed, if necessary, by Sacramental Confession CCC 1446]). We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our faith, our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.

Being a faithful Catholic is simple. We are expected to obey the five simple precepts (rules) of the Church CCC 2041-3], and nothing else. The precepts of the Church are:

1. • You shall attend Mass on Sundays and on holy days of obligation and rest from servile labor.
   • You shall confess your sins at least once a year.
   • You shall receive the sacrament of the Eucharist at least during the Easter season.
   • You shall observe the days of fasting and abstinence established by the Church.
   • You shall help to provide for the needs of the Church.
   Nothing else is expected of a faithful Catholic. We are expected to obey these rules because the Church expects it of us, and Christ gave the Church the authority to impose (or lift) such rules Matthew 16:19]. We can exceed these rules (and most do), but it is never required either by the Church or by God as a condition of salvation.
   
   There is a little bit of complexity introduced to the precepts in way of common-sense exceptions to these rules, such as:
   • Fasting generally applies to those ages 18-59 for whom fasting would not be a medically harmful.
   • We can lawfully miss a Mass in the performance of an act of mercy which necessarily conflicts.
   That is the sum-total of the extent by which we are saved and remain faithful Catholics. I did that in, what, five paragraphs?
   
   For those who wish to EXCEED the minimum (and many do) the Church offers a wide range of practices and devotions. Because so many Catholics avail themselves of these opportunities, some people might think they are an integral part of Catholicism. But this is a mistaken opinion. And, by the way, all of these devotions (that I can think of) are available to protestants as well, if they cared to practice them (some do).
   
   For Popes, Bishops, Canon Lawyers, Nuncios, etc, the Church is enormously complicated. Vatican State is an autonomous nation. It has its own diplomatic corps and fields ambassadors. It issues it’s own postage stamps! But the guy in the pew need not concern himself with any of this. For the guy in the pew, becoming and remaining a faithful catholic is SO simple.

 

[Jon_S_1]

NOOOO. It is SO simple!

Salvation is simple. We are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism and by nothing else CCC 1263], (Our Baptismal Grace is renewed, if necessary, by Sacramental Confession CCC 1446]). We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our faith, our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.

*]You
Nothing else is expected of a faithful Catholic. We are expected to obey these rules because the Church expects it of us, and Christ gave the Church the authority to impose (or lift) such rules Matthew 16:19]. We can exceed these rules (and most do), but it is never required either by the Church or by God as a condition of salvation.

This is 100% none sense. Where you come up with it is beyond comprehension. You do grave disservice to so many by propagating this.

Perhaps we should call this Filmerism…it’s certsinly not catholicism.

Perhaps you should read more of your catechism.

1253 Baptism is the sacrament of faith.54 But faith needs the community of believers. It is only within the faith of the Church that each of the faithful can believe. The faith required for Baptism is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop. The catechumen or the godparent is asked: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” The response is: “Faith!”

You also completely negate the parts of the catechism that explicitly say that faith and belief are required. I presented them before and you ignored them. Here they are again:

The necessity of faith

161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation.42 "Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life ‘But he who endures to the end.’"43

What is your angle anyway?

Are you trying to convince yourself that being baptized and going to church while disregarding God will save you?

It won’t. Only faith in Christ that results in conversion of your life into his will save you.

III. THE CONVERSION OF THE BAPTIZED

1427 Jesus calls to conversion. This call is an essential part of the proclamation of the kingdom: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel."16 In the Church’s preaching this call is addressed first to those who do not yet know Christ and his Gospel. Also, Baptism is the principal place for the first and fundamental conversion. It is by faith in the Gospel and by Baptism17 that one renounces evil and gains salvation, that is, the forgiveness of all sins and the gift of new life.

1428 Christ’s call to conversion continues to resound in the lives of Christians. This second conversion is an uninterrupted task for the whole Church who, "clasping sinners to her bosom, [is] at once holy and always in need of purification, [and] follows constantly the path of penance and renewal."18 This endeavor of conversion is not just a human work. It is the movement of a “contrite heart,” drawn and moved by grace to respond to the merciful love of God who loved us first.19

1429 St. Peter’s conversion after he had denied his master three times bears witness to this. Jesus’ look of infinite mercy drew tears of repentance from Peter and, after the Lord’s resurrection, a threefold affirmation of love for him.20 The second conversion also has a communitarian dimension, as is clear in the Lord’s call to a whole Church: "Repent!"21

St. Ambrose says of the two conversions that, in the Church, "there are water and tears: the water of Baptism and the tears of repentance."22
IV. INTERIOR PENANCE

1430 Jesus’ call to conversion and penance, like that of the prophets before him, does not aim first at outward works, “sackcloth and ashes,” fasting and mortification, but at the conversion of the heart, interior conversion. Without this, such penances remain sterile and false; however, interior conversion urges expression in visible signs, gestures and works of penance.23

1431 Interior repentance is a radical reorientation of our whole life, a return, a conversion to God with all our heart, an end of sin, a turning away from evil, with repugnance toward the evil actions we have committed. At the same time it entails the desire and resolution to change one’s life, with hope in God’s mercy and trust in the help of his grace. This conversion of heart is accompanied by a salutary pain and sadness which the Fathers called animi cruciatus (affliction of spirit) and compunctio cordis (repentance of heart).24

1432 The human heart is heavy and hardened. God must give man a new heart.25 Conversion is first of all a work of the grace of God who makes our hearts return to him: "Restore us to thyself, O LORD, that we may be restored!"26 God gives us the strength to begin anew. It is in discovering the greatness of God’s love that our heart is shaken by the horror and weight of sin and begins to fear offending God by sin and being separated from him. The human heart is converted by looking upon him whom our sins have pierced:27

 

[DavidFilmer]

This is 100% none sense. Where you come up with it is beyond comprehension.

Well, I did cite it.

Perhaps you should read more of your catechism.

1253 Baptism is the sacrament of faith.54 But faith needs the community of believers. It is only within the faith of the Church that each of the faithful can believe. The faith required for Baptism is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop. The catechumen or the godparent is asked: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” The response is: “Faith!”

Most Catholics are Baptized as infants and thus have no personal faith. The Faith of Baptism comes from the parents, godparents, and the Catholic community at large. When I said we are not saved by our faith, I meant our personal faith, not somebody else’s faith. Obviously adult converts have personal faith as well, but those are a small minority of Catholics.

Obviously an adult Christian convert is expected to have faith, or he wouldn’t be seeking Baptism. I kinda thought this was flippin obvious and did not need to be explained. I see I was wrong.

You also completely negate the parts of the catechism that explicitly say that faith and belief are required. I presented them before and you ignored them. Here they are again:

The necessity of faith

Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. “Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life ‘But he who endures to the end.’”

I don’t think the Catechism intends to suggest that a Catholic who has a crisis of Faith, and who dies while that crisis is unresolved, is condemned to hell. We loose the Grace of Christian Baptism through mortal sin, and through nothing else.

A person who willfully turns his back on God commits mortal sin and is in danger of hellfire. A Catholic who has an involuntary crisis of faith does not even sin venially. Great Saints and Doctors of the Church have experienced a crisis of the faith. It can happen to anyone of any religion.

I think we are talking about two different kinds of people who lack faith. You are talking about those who refuse to believe. I am talking about those who want to believe, but can’t, or even don’t know they should believe (such as those Baptized as infants but raised in another faith).

My comments assume a person of goodwill, and not an obstinate sinner. If you interpreted my remarks to say that an obstinate sinner who turns his back on God can go to heaven just because he’s Baptized then you seriously misunderstood me, and I can understand your objection.

I guess I didn’t think I really had to explain that, either, but I see that I was wrong.

What is your angle anyway?

My “angle” is to reply to the OP. The OPs friend accused the Church of being complicated. The Church is actually quite simple, for the guy in the pew. People like you try to make it more complicated than the Church expects by adding all sorts of other conditions.

I showed that the friend was wrong; it is really quite simple. I boiled it down to one (or, maybe two) specific Sacraments and five specific rules. Anyone cal look at that and know what is expected of him. Which specific Sacraments and rules did I leave out?

Are you trying to convince yourself that being baptized and going to church while disregarding God will save you?

I’m not trying to do anything. I am convinced that if I die in a State of Grace then I am saved. I am convinced that only mortal sin can remove me from a State of Grace. I am convinced that attending Confession restores me to a State of Grace. Not Confession + anything else. If I have misrepresented Catholic teaching, please tell me how.

I hardly think that disregarding God’s will will save me (if it did, I would be in really good shape). We disregard God’s will each time we sin, even the most minor venial sin. Under some circumstances this disregard rises to mortal sin. If that happens, we can’t do anything about it except go to Confession.

It won’t. Only faith in Christ that results in conversion of your life into his will save you.

Oh, NOW I see the actual root of your error. Faith will not save us (that’s awfully close to Lutheranism). Only Grace will save me (and you). I see you are a convert - were you Lutheran? Do you still have cobwebs of Lutheran teaching that haven’t been cleared away? I get that - I still have Anglican throwbacks sometimes. But, at least, Anglicans also believe that the Grace of Christian Baptism is how we are saved, not by our personal faith.

1427 …It is by faith in the Gospel and by Baptism that one renounces evil and gains salvation, that is, the forgiveness of all sins and the gift of new life.

This is the same thing as the first comment that I replied to, and my response is the same.

Woah, I just scrolled down - you’re, like, quoting a whole chapter, regardless of whether particular statements are relevant to this discussion (just like I had to chop off most of #1427). I’m not gonna edit your response for relevancy. If you want to cite the relevant bits then I don’t mind telling you how they ACTUALLY relate to the economy of salvation.

 

[DavidFilmer]

1253 Baptism is the sacrament of faith.54 But faith needs the community of believers. It is only within the faith of the Church that each of the faithful can believe. The faith required for Baptism is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop. The catechumen or the godparent is asked: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” The response is: “Faith!”

Funny, but I remembered the response differently than what is in the Catechism. So I Googled a bit. According to this source, at least in the 1970 English Missal (boldface mine):

Celebrant: What do you ask of God’s Church for N.?
Parents: Baptism.

I’m pretty sure that’s the only response I’ve ever heard at any Baptism I’ve ever been to (which is many - we do ours during Mass). But I cannot say for sure whether I’ve been at any Baptism since the new Roman Missal was published. Has the new Roman Missal (or the English translation) been changed to reflect the answer shown in the Catechism?

 

[DavidFilmer]

Well, I did cite it.

Perhaps you should read more of your catechism.

Most Catholics are Baptized as infants and thus have no personal faith. The Faith of Baptism comes from the parents, godparents, and the Catholic community at large. When I said we are not saved by our faith, I meant our personal faith, not somebody else’s faith. Obviously adult converts have personal faith as well, but those are a small minority of Catholics.

Obviously an adult Christian convert is expected to have faith, or he wouldn’t be seeking Baptism. I kinda thought this was flippin obvious and did not need to be explained. I see I was wrong.

I don’t think the Catechism intends to suggest that a Catholic who has a crisis of Faith, and who dies while that crisis is unresolved, is condemned to hell. We loose the Grace of Christian Baptism through mortal sin, and through nothing else.

A person who willfully turns his back on God commits mortal sin and is in danger of hellfire. A Catholic who has an involuntary crisis of faith does not even sin venially. Great Saints and Doctors of the Church have experienced a crisis of the faith. It can happen to anyone of any religion.

I think we are talking about two different kinds of people who lack faith. You are talking about those who refuse to believe. I am talking about those who want to believe, but can’t, or even don’t know they should believe (such as those Baptized as infants but raised in another faith).

My comments assume a person of goodwill, and not an obstinate sinner. If you interpreted my remarks to say that an obstinate sinner who turns his back on God can go to heaven just because he’s Baptized then you seriously misunderstood me, and I can understand your objection.

I guess I didn’t think I really had to explain that, either, but I see that I was wrong.

My “angle” is to reply to the OP. The OPs friend accused the Church of being complicated. The Church is actually quite simple, for the guy in the pew. People like you try to make it more complicated than the Church expects by adding all sorts of other conditions.

I showed that the friend was wrong; it is really quite simple. I boiled it down to one (or, maybe two) specific Sacraments and five specific rules. Anyone cal look at that and know what is expected of him. Which specific Sacraments and rules did I leave out?

I’m not trying to do anything. I am convinced that if I die in a State of Grace then I am saved. I am convinced that only mortal sin can remove me from a State of Grace. I am convinced that attending Confession restores me to a State of Grace. Not Confession + anything else. If I have misrepresented Catholic teaching, please tell me how.

I hardly think that disregarding God’s will will save me (if it did, I would be in really good shape). We disregard God’s will each time we sin, even the most minor venial sin. Under some circumstances this disregard rises to mortal sin. If that happens, we can’t do anything about it except go to Confession. If I’m wrong, tell me how.

Oh, NOW I see the actual root of your error. Faith will not save us (that’s awfully close to Lutheranism). Only Grace will save me (and you). I see you are a convert - were you Lutheran? Do you still have cobwebs of Lutheran teaching that haven’t been cleared away? I get that - I still have Anglican throwbacks sometimes. But, at least, Anglicans also believe that the Grace of Christian Baptism is how we are saved, not by our personal faith.

This is the same thing as the first comment that I replied to, and my response is the same.

Woah, I just scrolled down - you’re, like, quoting a whole chapter, regardless of whether particular statements are relevant to this discussion (just like I had to chop off most of #1427). I’m not gonna edit your response for relevancy. If you want to cite the relevant bits then I don’t mind telling you how they ACTUALLY relate to the economy of salvation.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Well several things.

1). I did understand you to say someone who obstinately does not believe can be saved by going through the motions. It sounds like we agree this is not the case.

1. I think you make an error in your understanding of the person with a crisis of faith that still goes to mass. I agree that a crisis of faith is not in itself a mortal sin and mortal sin is what separates us from God. So the catholic who has a crisis of faith but continues in mass and the sacraments is showing that he has faith in Christ and his Church, if he didn’t he wouldn’t go. This is what the catechism asks in paragraph 156.

156 **What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe “because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived”.**28 So "that the submission of our faith might nevertheless be in accordance with reason, God willed that external proofs of his Revelation should be joined to the internal helps of the Holy Spirit."29 Thus the miracles of Christ and the saints, prophecies, the Church’s growth and holiness, and her fruitfulness and stability “are the most certain signs of divine Revelation, adapted to the intelligence of all”; they are “motives of credibility” (motiva credibilitatis), which show that the assent of faith is “by no means a blind impulse of the mind”.

3). I am not a former Lutheran, but I believe Gods grace moves is to faith and seeking God. Responding to that grace and pursuing God in faith is what is our salvation. As Galations 5:8 says, “For neither circumcision nor in circumcision but faith working through love”. Faith working through love is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches.

4). I would like to understand your response to the following paragraph from the catechism.

161 **Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation.**42 "Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore **without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life **‘But he who endures to the end.’"43

1. perhaps Pope Benedict XVI speaking on “Faith Alone” can help you.

"The wall is no longer necessary; our common identity within the diversity of cultures is Christ, and it is he who makes us just. Being just simply means being with Christ and in Christ. And this suffices. Further observances are no longer necessary. For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love. So it is that in the Letter to the Galatians in which he primarily developed his teaching on justification St Paul speaks of faith that works through love (cf. Gal 5: 14).

At the end, we can only pray the Lord that he help us to believe; really believe. Believing thus becomes life, unity with Christ, the transformation of our life. And thus, transformed by his love, by the love of God and neighbour, we can truly be just in God’s eyes."

---

Read the entire thing here: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081119_en.html

1. Peace be with you

 

[Church_Militant]

The church is not too complicated…it’s that authentic New Testament Christianity is more complicated than many n-Cs have been led to believe, having heard from preachers that we Catholics departed from the “simplicity of the Gospel” in spite of the fact that there is no such term for it in the New Testament and a simple reading of it will give the objective reader a view that is far more in line with the Catholic faith than anything else.

I have summed it up this way. Who REALLY Preaches “A Different Gospel”?

 

[steve_b]

NOOOO. It is SO simple!

Salvation is simple. We are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism and by nothing else CCC 1263], (Our Baptismal Grace is renewed, if necessary, by Sacramental Confession CCC 1446]). We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our faith, our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.

Being a faithful Catholic is simple. We are expected to obey the five simple precepts (rules) of the Church CCC 2041-3], and nothing else. The precepts of the Church are:

1. • You shall attend Mass on Sundays and on holy days of obligation and rest from servile labor.
   • You shall confess your sins at least once a year.
   • You shall receive the sacrament of the Eucharist at least during the Easter season.
   • You shall observe the days of fasting and abstinence established by the Church.
   • You shall help to provide for the needs of the Church.
   Nothing else is expected of a faithful Catholic. We are expected to obey these rules because the Church expects it of us, and Christ gave the Church the authority to impose (or lift) such rules Matthew 16:19]. We can exceed these rules (and most do), but it is never required either by the Church or by God as a condition of salvation.
   
   There is a little bit of complexity introduced to the precepts in way of common-sense exceptions to these rules, such as:
   • Fasting generally applies to those ages 18-59 for whom fasting would not be a medically harmful.
   • We can lawfully miss a Mass in the performance of an act of mercy which necessarily conflicts.
   That is the sum-total of the extent by which we are saved and remain faithful Catholics. I did that in, what, five paragraphs?
   
   For those who wish to EXCEED the minimum (and many do) the Church offers a wide range of practices and devotions. Because so many Catholics avail themselves of these opportunities, some people might think they are an integral part of Catholicism. But this is a mistaken opinion. And, by the way, all of these devotions (that I can think of) are available to protestants as well, if they cared to practice them (some do).
   
   For Popes, Bishops, Canon Lawyers, Nuncios, etc, the Church is enormously complicated. Vatican State is an autonomous nation. It has its own diplomatic corps and fields ambassadors. It issues it’s own postage stamps! But the guy in the pew need not concern himself with any of this. For the guy in the pew, becoming and remaining a faithful catholic is SO simple.

1. 
   to test this Minimulistic opinion, here’s what Peter taught.
   
   **2 Pet 1: *5 "For this very reason, you must make every effort to support your faith with goodness, and goodness with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with endurance, and endurance with godliness, 7 and godliness with mutuale] affection, and mutualf] affection with love. 8 For if these things are yours and are increasing among you, they keep you from being ineffective and unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For anyone who lacks these things is short-sighted and blind, and is forgetful of the cleansing of past sins. 10 Therefore, brothers and sisters,g] be all the more eager to confirm your call and election, for if you do this, you will never stumble. 11 For in this way, entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be richly provided for you. 12 Therefore I intend to keep on reminding you of these things, though you know them already and are established in the truth that has come to you. 13I think it right, as long as I am in this body,h] to refresh your memory, 14 since I know that my death(“2 peter NRSVCE - Salutation - Simeon Peter, a servant - Bible Gateway”)] will come soon, as indeed our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. 15 And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things".
   
   Peter mentions 7 attributes that we must add to our faith in ever increasing amounts. That means without stopping, we must add (increase) those attributes as long as we live. And Peter thought it necessary to make this point not only to teach but remind us, at all times i.e. to recall (never forget) this teaching…or what does he say will happen to the one who lacks this i.e. blows off this teaching i.e. takes the minimulist approach ?
   • One is deemed to be blind, ineffective, & unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ
   • they are not eager to confirm their call & election,
   • they will fall,
   • their entry into heaven will NOT be provided.
   Does that sound like one can skate by with the minimum? No.

 

[DavidFilmer]

I’m pretty sure that “Baptism”] the only response I’ve ever heard at any Baptism I’ve ever been to (which is many - we do ours during Mass). But I cannot say for sure whether I’ve been at any Baptism since the new Roman Missal was published. Has the new Roman Missal (or the English translation) been changed to reflect the answer shown in the Catechism?

My internet search could not find the text of the Rite of Baptism as used today. So I asked my brother about this (Father Eric Filmer, a CAF Apologist). This is his reply:
Father Eric Filmer (by email to David):

Despite the new version of the English Roman Missal, the “Rites I” book is still the primary source for baptism liturgies. The passage in question is addressed in Rites I in “Baptism for Children, #37” which reads as follows:

---

What do you ask of God’s Church for N.?
Parents: Baptism

The celebrant may choose other words for this dialogue. The first reply [presumably to the question, what name do you give?] may be given by someone other than the parents if local custom gives him/her the right to name the child. In the second response the parents may use other words, e.g., faith or entrance into the Church or eternal life.

---

Going back to CCC #1253, the text states, “The faith required for baptism…”, and therefore it recognizes that the virtue of faith is an antecedent for the sacrament. But then it goes on to say, “…is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop.” If we back up to the beginning of #1253, we read: “Baptism is the sacrament of faith. But faith needs the community of believers. It is only within the faith of the Church that each of the faithful can believe.”

For example, God can infuse faith in me as a theological virtue, but this does not teach me the Creed or give me knowledge of the Gospel. Rather, by God’s own design, that is something done through the Church (which includes the role of parents in teaching their children). Keep in mind that prior to the pouring of water at baptism, those about to be baptized express their belief in the creed (or, in the case of children, the parents and godparents express it on their behalf). Going back to the Rite of Baptism for Children, in #123, after covering the Creed, the minister says, “This is the faith of the Church. We are proud to profess it, in Christ Jesus our Lord.” And then (in #124), the minister asks the parents and godparents, “Is it your will that N. should be baptized in the faith of the Church, which we have all professed with you?” (and the reply, of course, is, “It is”).

So “Baptism” seems the “default” response, at least in the English Rite, while “Faith” (or something similar) may be licitly substituted at the discretion of the celebrant.

I think it awkward to ask “faith” from the Church. The Church can obviously encourage and promote faith (as Fr. Eric explains), but I don’t believe the Church can impart faith (it is one of the theological virtues of the Holy Spirit). I suppose it is to be inferred that the Church’s role is in support of faith, rather than as a source of faith. But it seems that “Baptism” is a “better” answer, as it asks of the Church what the Church has the ability to confer, without making any assumptions.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Does that sound like one can skate by with the minimum? No.

Obviously not, according to your interpretation of Scripture. And I’m not saying it’s a bad interpretation. But you are speaking out of turn when you take your interpretation of Scripture and try to say it is Catholic doctrine and adds to what the Church defines as the minimum for salvation. That’s what we have a Magesterium for.

Can you show me, in actual Catholic doctrine, ANYTHING that says that a person must do anything more than remain in a State of Grace in order to attain salvation? (to do this, of course, we must respect the five precepts).

The Church has five very ancient rules that the Church (not you, not me) defines as the minimum requirement to be a faithful Catholic. Minimum means the very least possible to still be acceptable. Now you are saying that the minimum that the Church established is not enough. Well, it is either the minimum, or it is not the minimum. The Church says it is the minimum. You say it is not.

I’m going with the Church on this one.

I’ve worked as an engineer most of my career. There’s a nonsensical sign that some philosophically-challenged engineers hang on their walls: Good Enough - Isn’t. That’s nonsense. If it’s good enough, it’s good enough. I get the intent - there is always room for improvement in every design. But there is a standard for “good enough” and when something meets that standard it is, by definition, good enough.

I’m not saying it’s GOOD to meet just the minimum. I’m saying it is SUFFICIENT to meet just the minimum. Raising the bar by piling on your own opinions is exactly what drove the OP’s buddy to accuse the Church of being overly complex.

Can you show me anything in Catholic Doctrine that says good enough - isn’t?

I was a mechanical design engineer - there’s another sign often found on the walls of manufacturing engineers: At some point, you have to shoot the designers and go into production. That’s a philosophically sound response to Good Enough - Isn’t.

 

[DavidFilmer]

4). I would like to understand your response to the following paragraph from the catechism.

161 Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. “Since “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore **without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life **‘But he who endures to the end.’”

I’ll respond to this point only, since I think we agree more than we disagree on the others.

When the Catechism says “no one has ever attained justification” without Faith, clearly this is not meant to be an absolute statement that NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON EVER. Because there are a number of common-sense exceptions that immediately come to mind, which need not be exhaustively enumerated in the Catechism:

• Baptized infants who die
• Baptized infants raised in some other non-Christian faith
• Baptized persons who lack the mental capacity to form faith

I believe that the intent of the Catechism is to apply to the typical case of a Baptized person who is raised in a Catholic setting, and not to “fringe exceptions” which would still not merit condemnation even where personal faith is lacking.

I believe an involuntary crisis of faith would also fall into this “fringe exception” category. You have already accepted that it is not mortally sinful, which means it does not remove us from a State of Grace, which means it cannot deprive us of salvation.

The only way that an involuntary crisis of faith could prevent us from “obtaining eternal life” (in the words of CCC 161) is if it was mortally sinful, which we both agree that it is not. Therefore, I don’t believe that the warnings of CCC 161 include those in a crisis of faith any more than they include Baptized infants.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Too complicated?
Is this perhaps another way of suggesting that there are too many things to dive into?
We can’t know what the objection really is seated in with such a lack of detail.
I find non catholics to be very complicated in the fact that one can not worship everyday in their respective churches and must find a way to worship on their two or three day a week schedule. What happens to those who either want to worship everyday or need to balance work with worship?
At least the Catholic Church makes every effort to open their doors everyday.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Too complicated?
Is this perhaps another way of suggesting that there are too many things to dive into?

Within the context of the OP’s question, his buddy thought the Church was too complicated. The practice of our Faith is as complicated as we choose to make it. We have rosaries, holy hours, stations of the Cross, novenas, indulgences, pilgrimages, the Divine Office, prayer cards, sacramentals, and all sorts of other things.

The fact that so many Catholics do these things leads a lot of non-Catholics to believe they are somehow expected of us. But, in reality, the Church expects none of those things. The Church encourages them, but does not expect them.

The Church has established a minimum of what She expects of us, and this has been around for a very, very long time. It consists of one (or two) Sacraments and five rules (none of which are especially demanding).

The Church established this minimum as a starting point, not a finish line. We gotta start somewhere.

So, I suppose a better answer to the question, “is the Church too complicated,” would be “well, it starts off simple, but most Catholics choose to add more to their faith.”

 

[Darryl_B]

Within the context of the OP’s question, his buddy thought the Church was too complicated. The practice of our Faith is as complicated as we choose to make it. We have rosaries, holy hours, stations of the Cross, novenas, indulgences, pilgrimages, the Divine Office, prayer cards, sacramentals, and all sorts of other things.

The fact that so many Catholics do these things leads a lot of non-Catholics to believe they are somehow expected of us. But, in reality, the Church expects none of those things. The Church encourages them, but does not expect them.

The Church has established a minimum of what She expects of us, and this has been around for a very, very long time. It consists of one (or two) Sacraments and five rules (none of which are especially demanding).

The Church established this minimum as a starting point, not a finish line. We gotta start somewhere.

So, I suppose a better answer to the question, “is the Church too complicated,” would be “well, it starts off simple, but most Catholics choose to add more to their faith.”

I would like to approach it from a different direction. Imagine two people getting married (that is the minimum), they think they know all about each other, but every day there is new learnings to experience, new things to develop understanding, new things to love about that relationship.

If one party turns around and says “this marriage is too complicated”, it means one thing, that they are not every day experiencing new learnings, there are not developments of understanding, and it is not the Catholic Church that loses love.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Within the context of the OP’s question, his buddy thought the Church was too complicated. The practice of our Faith is as complicated as we choose to make it. We have rosaries, holy hours, stations of the Cross, novenas, indulgences, pilgrimages, the Divine Office, prayer cards, sacramentals, and all sorts of other things.

The fact that so many Catholics do these things leads a lot of non-Catholics to believe they are somehow expected of us. But, in reality, the Church expects none of those things. The Church encourages them, but does not expect them.

The Church has established a minimum of what She expects of us, and this has been around for a very, very long time. It consists of one (or two) Sacraments and five rules (none of which are especially demanding).

The Church established this minimum as a starting point, not a finish line. We gotta start somewhere.

So, I suppose a better answer to the question, “is the Church too complicated,” would be “well, it starts off simple, but most Catholics choose to add more to their faith.”

I could not disagree with a single thing you stated here, and applaud you for your patience in giving the answer that was most helpful IMHO not just to this seeker, but to all that pass by.

There is so much to dive into. I have personally taken years of my life to try to read and see.
I have had to rely on the help of many here, and still with years of reading, I will never be bored my friends.