K
ktm
Guest
This is an interesting statement. Care to elaborate a little on it?
- Status
D
debi
Guest
Funny I didn’t even think that the answer “I was raised Catholic” could provoke such response. Raised Catholic implies that there was some Catholic teaching or training going on in a person’s impressionable years. Born Catholic implies at least Baptism in the Catholic Church (IMO).I’ve had more than one friend say to me, when prompted with careful language regarding religion, “I was raised Catholic.”
I usually take this to be code language for “I am not a practicing Catholic.”
How do you handle this? Do you say anything in response? Whenever I hear this I just drop the subject since I can’t really see it going anywhere. I would appreciate any wisdom you might have on this matter. One must be careful about getting in someone’s face about it, so I wouldn’t say “Oh, so you don’t go to church anymore?” Is there some gentle way of broaching this subject with friends?
I guess that I feel that way because being the oldest of 5 sibs I had the opportunity for Catholic Schools thru 10th grade, my youngest brother was baptised Catholic nothing else.
Are we both cradle Catholics
?For me, when I was saying that I was raised Catholic, meant that I was Baptised, had first Communion and Reconcilliation…Then I had a brain fart and went looking for myself.:yawn: . Long story short, I really believe if someone, a good Catholic who lived the faith, would have challanged me I would have reverted sooner.
By all means, gently or in your face - depending on the person, evangelize. Do not be afraid. How sad to miss an opportunity to save a soul and how wonderful to reconnect someone to God and His true Chruch. Glad someone finally got in my face and called me on my stuff. I will be forever grateful. If someone does not want some dialogue on the subject they would not usually say something like I was something to someone is something.
blessings
P
PXseeker
Guest
Sure,
Our senior pastor holds John XXIII in very high regard. VII was a watershed for ecumenism, by having representatives attending, a lot of dialogue started. In the Lutheran Book of Worship on can find a memorial day dedicated to John XXIII.
As a result, of the ecumenical dialogues, we now celebrate the eucharist at every service (in this parish), we distribute ashes on Ash Wednesday (as Pastor put it- shouldn’t we have called it “ashless wednesday” in the old days?). Litugically we are very close. Theologically, the joint declaration on Justification, for all its diplomatic language and flaws, is still an impressive document.
An awful lot of folks don’t realize that Lutherans confess the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, that we confess the creeds, that we are in fact. “very catholic” in many ways.
Peace,
John
T
Tanais
Guest
PX,
I hope it is not incorrect to assume you are not part of the LC-MS? LC-MS, which I was formally part of, was far too conservative to include a memorial day to John XIII. Anyways, Yes you are correct in assuming Lutherans can be quite “catholic”, The Church herself recongizes that Lutheranism is one of the closest Protestants denominations to Catholicism, even calling it “orthodox protestants”, see Catholic Encyclopedia: Lutheranism. You cited the fact that Lutherans believe in the true presence, which is true somewhat in what is called consubstantiation, as opposed to the Catholic transubstantiation. The main problem I have with consubstantiation is that it is sort of a slippery slope. Once Transubstantiation is denied and consubstantiation is upheld one can find one slipping deeper and deeper until finally a merely symbolic interpretation is proclaimed. Furthermore, it makes the sacrament more earthly since it doesn’t really lose anything just gains a new substance. A good article of Transubstantiation. Furthermore there is the all important issue of authority, the issue that all differences boil down to. Lutherans accept various strands of Sola Scriptura. The Church continues to reiterate the Apostolic Teachings that both Scripture and Tradition are inerrant and infallibly interpreted by the Magisterium.
Liturgically we are also very different. Catholics look at Mass as a sacrifice, a literal sacrifice. It is our highest form of worship. However, Lutherans like many other Protestants, do not have the Mass and their highest form of woship is prayer, the sunday services being merely extended prayers. This explains why they view prayer as solely a means of worship and accuse Catholics of woshipping saints. Also, it is not required for communion to be offered at every service, at least not in LC-MS. Sometimes they only do the liturgy of the Word, We Catholics however Always offer the Eucharist at Mass, keeping the liturgy of the Word and Eucharist together. In Lutheran services the focus seems to be more on the liturgy of the Word whereas for Catholics it is mainly of the sacrifice before us.
Anyhow, that was my two cents
P
PXseeker
Guest
Tanais,
Actually I’m an ELCA member. The LCMS is just a little too rigid for my taste in the “bright lines” / rules department. My congregation choose to celebrate the eucharist at every Sunday service, but that is our choice, many ELCA congregations celebrate the eucharist monthly. Our pastor was involved in ecumenical forums with Catholics and Anglicans at Notre Dame, I think this influenced him in terms of worship.
As far as transubstantion goes, I don’t find this doctrine compelling; never did. Like the Orthodox, I prefer to classify the “how” as a mystery, the result is undeniable: Christ is truly present. Viewing the eucharistic liturgy as a celebration vs a priestly sacrifice is also attractive and more consistent with Lutheran theology. Which brings me to the really compelling doctrine of unconditional grace. The message comes through in sermons throughout all Lutheran denoms, be they LCMS, ELCA or others. Our response to this gift: sharing garce through outreach, prayer, social justice programs flows so beautifully, so naturally.
As you point out, we share so much and are so close in many ways. In my case the Spirit moved me to return to a community of faith, and where I found my new spiritual family is Lutheran. My involement with the word, in service / mission outreach, and worship are radically different from a rather apathetic membership in the RCC.
My view on the differences - this is a “win, win” situation, we’re not in competition, but doing God’s work, side by side.
Peace,
John
T
Tanais
Guest
Dear John (I have the urge to call you johnny boy for some reason, please forgive me)
Anyhow, Transubstantiation itself is a mystery as well. The question isn’t “how” but “what is it”. It isn’t how the body and blood are present, but are they present and in what way? No many may brush this off and just not care (this is where true apathy resides) however we must not fall into that trap. A very postmodern philosophy, one they I believe has been too influential in some ecumenical circles, is that ideas do not matter. However, it can be shown through reason that ideas do matter, they “have consequences” as many would say. Do not simply brush it off as a mystery and not think about it, something many anti-religious people accuse us of.
My view on the differences - this is a “win, win” situation, we’re not in competition, but doing God’s work, side by side.
Essentially it seems to me that you are brushing off our differences. Sort of, lets just agree to disagree and be happy. I would agree with you that in large part we can be allies in certain aspects, mainly in the cultural war we are currently in, however we still have fundamental differences, e.g. issues of authority, of justification. To simply brush this off and say we agree on the essentials begs me to ask what are the essentials that we agree on? I find that Catholics and Protestants essentially disagree on the essentials. We disagree on what the essentials are. We disagree on aspects of salvation, justification, etc. which all sound pretty essential to me.
apathetic membership in the RCC.
First of all, I must advise you not to use the Anglican way of refering to the Church. The proper name is NOT the Roman Catholic Church, for several reasons. First, it excludes the many non-Roman rite faithful, who, although they may not adhere to some of the same liturgical practices, are still in complete accord with Rome and her teachings. 2nd of all, it is a contradiction. Catholic means universal, so essentially you are labelling a universal with a particular, i.e. Roman. Also, the Church of Rome is not the Catholic Church, just one of many Churches that has a universal responsibility.
(continued)
T
Tanais
Guest
(continued do to character limits)
As far as the apathy, yes it is indeed sad that many Catholics are apathetic about their faith, however I know many, and I mean many, Catholics who are on fire in their faith. Your sweeping generalization does not do justice to the faithful, many who are not in the least apathetic. You simply cannot judge a whole group, especially one with over 1 billion members, by a singular adjective like that and typically be right. If suppose I met a few asian people and found them to be quite belligerent, i would rightly be judged a prejudiced bigot if I from then on viewed all asians as belligerent psychopaths. Now if it is you who is apathetic, then perhaps you have reasons I cannot address without ample information.
Also, the Church does teach that grace is unconditional. This is nothing really new. I would highly suggest picking up a catechism (I say this so that you can learn a bit more about the Catholic Faith and so you won’t have common misconceptions like these in your mind, just trying to help out), perhaps a penny catechism would be nice too(it’s pocket size).
Please, do not take my words offensively, I try to be blunt to be sincere. May God be with you!
As far as the apathy, yes it is indeed sad that many Catholics are apathetic about their faith, however I know many, and I mean many, Catholics who are on fire in their faith. Your sweeping generalization does not do justice to the faithful, many who are not in the least apathetic. You simply cannot judge a whole group, especially one with over 1 billion members, by a singular adjective like that and typically be right. If suppose I met a few asian people and found them to be quite belligerent, i would rightly be judged a prejudiced bigot if I from then on viewed all asians as belligerent psychopaths. Now if it is you who is apathetic, then perhaps you have reasons I cannot address without ample information.
Also, the Church does teach that grace is unconditional. This is nothing really new. I would highly suggest picking up a catechism (I say this so that you can learn a bit more about the Catholic Faith and so you won’t have common misconceptions like these in your mind, just trying to help out), perhaps a penny catechism would be nice too(it’s pocket size).
Please, do not take my words offensively, I try to be blunt to be sincere. May God be with you!
T
Tanais
Guest
Excuse me John but in my typing I somehow forgot another point I wish to add. You said:
Viewing the eucharistic liturgy as a celebration vs a priestly sacrifice
I just wanted to know, are these two concepts mutually exclusive? Could it not be the same way that Christ’s sacrifice for us be a celebration? I do not see how these two concepts are exclusive to one another. Why does it have to be posed in an either/or fashion?
Anyways, Peace once again! May you find The One whom you seek.
until next time,
Viewing the eucharistic liturgy as a celebration vs a priestly sacrifice
I just wanted to know, are these two concepts mutually exclusive? Could it not be the same way that Christ’s sacrifice for us be a celebration? I do not see how these two concepts are exclusive to one another. Why does it have to be posed in an either/or fashion?
Anyways, Peace once again! May you find The One whom you seek.
until next time,
P
PXseeker
Guest
Tanais,
You misunderstood me. I was witnessing my own personal experience; the reference was a self reference, sorry that wasn’t clear to you. I was a fairly apathetic cafeteria catholic, and the sign in front on my old church says “Roman Catholic Church”; hence the RCC reference. I am not aquainted with the 28 other traditions which acknowledge the leadership of the Roman pontiff.
I am a much more engaged, spiritual Christian now than in more former experiece. I never intended to generalize my experience to anyone else.
As far your desire to focus on differences and distinctions, I’m glad that perspective works for you. I found that it was not productive for me. I will continue to maintain that denominationalism in Christianity is not a “win / lose” proposition. The Spirit is working in many ways, in many congregations, through the faithful.
Peace,
John
S
Spiri220
Guest
I have to say that the statement “I was raised Catholic” generally means “but I’m not anymore”.
To make the claim that those of us who left “don’t understand the Faith” or “were raised in a nominally Catholic home” is arrogant nonsense. Many of us left because we DO understand the Faith, don’t agree with it, and chose to leave rather than stay and quietly pretend to believe.
I was educated by Nuns in elementary school (probably could still recite the Baltimore Catechism if I saw Sister Philomena coming at me with a ruler), Salesians in high school, and Vincentians in college,m where I got a minor in theology/philosophy. So I feel I do understand, and don’t agree, and it was more honest to leave.
To make the claim that those of us who left “don’t understand the Faith” or “were raised in a nominally Catholic home” is arrogant nonsense. Many of us left because we DO understand the Faith, don’t agree with it, and chose to leave rather than stay and quietly pretend to believe.
I was educated by Nuns in elementary school (probably could still recite the Baltimore Catechism if I saw Sister Philomena coming at me with a ruler), Salesians in high school, and Vincentians in college,m where I got a minor in theology/philosophy. So I feel I do understand, and don’t agree, and it was more honest to leave.
A
Auberon_Quin
Guest
You know, I really hate the responses that just agree with the previous post, but what harm does a little self-hatred do, really?
A-freakin’-men!!!
Very well said.
T
The_Barrister
Guest
Auberon Quin:
Now, how would Buddha have responded? (WWBD)
Really, was this necessary?
Now, how would Buddha have responded? (WWBD)
R
ralphinal
Guest
I usually recieve the statement the same way I do the ones about having “lots of black (or any other minority) friends”. It is one all too often used to cover hate or ignorance. I was raised Catholic, and can see no reason to leave the faith. There are people “raised American” who commeted espionage for other countries. Being raised or even educated in a particular idiology or faith does not mean that you internalize it or even try to make it a part of who you are.
A
Auberon_Quin
Guest
The Barrister:
Of course it wasn’t necessary. Is any of this stuff necessary?
He would have twirled a lotus flower, or some such thing. I tried that, but I don’t think I did it right because it didn’t show up on the board.Really, was this necessary?
Now, how would Buddha have responded? (WWBD)
Of course it wasn’t necessary. Is any of this stuff necessary?
K
ktm
Guest
Auberon Quin:
What stuff? I thought it was an interesting topic so I started a thread on it. Sorry if it annoys you but that wasn’t my intent. Anyhow, no need to read it if it gets you upset or something.
M
Mistermerlin
Guest
As a point of reference, when the Church issues an annulment, it doesn’t say that the marriage never existed. It says that a sacramental marriage did not exist.
If the marriage didn’t exist, there would be no need for an annulment and it sure would be hard to explain where those kids came from.
T
Tanais
Guest
Dear John,
I do not wish to sound far too technical but it appears to me you are intrenched in Religious Subjectivism, i.e. truth in the realm of religion is dictated solely by the individual. The reason I believe this is because of your statement: *I’m glad that perspective works for you. I found that it was not productive for me. * Translated, it sounds much like the subjectivist statement “what works for you may not necessarily work for you. What’s true to you isn’t true for me.”, a common philosophy of our age. I am glad you are much more engaged and active in your faith but I do not think that is reason to shut off your intellectual persuit of the faith. Anyone can be all “fired” up about their faith or belief, from communists, buddhists, fundamentalists, Catholics, but that doesn’t necessarily imply truth. Being “fired” up is like an emotion, it comes and goes rather quickly and is quite fickle. Fundamentalists often encounter this problem because they tend to be on “fire” with their faith in the beginning but later fall away once the emotional “high” recedes. I focus on these distinctions and differences because I am not gonna believe soemthing because it is the same as everything else. I find what is different and discern whether that is true or not. We make distinctions with our reason to locate the truth, the goal which all men seek, the Logos.
Anyways, Peace be with you!
P
PXseeker
Guest
****Tanais wrote" …*I focus on these distinctions and differences because I am not gonna believe soemthing because it is the same as everything else. I find what is different and discern whether that is true or not. We make distinctions with our reason to locate the truth, the goal which all men seek, the Logos.
Anyways, Peace be with you!
Dear Tanias,
That’s why what works for you might not work for me. I’m looking for “Truth” not “the Truth[tm]”.
From my perspective, the Spirit nutures all branches of Christianity, recogizing that humans are fragmented. Fragmented people perceive things differently, even spirituality. So the Comforter runs a spiritual “baskin robbins” if you will… lots of flavors. Rome only like to offer variations on vanilla (from my perspective).
I am a very logical, rational person. I’m a CPA, for goodness sake! I don’t think the Roman Church has a monopoly on “truth” or “the Truth” and that is not something which is swayed by argument. I follow my heart… my soul.
Peace,
John
p.s. - as to the “Sacrifice” of the Mass, I don’t mind if others view it as such. I have a lot of negative baggage from all my 49 years with the church and 13 years of education by religious. I’ll sing the theology of the Cross, but I won’t call Eucharist a “sacrifice”.
Anyways, Peace be with you!
Dear Tanias,
That’s why what works for you might not work for me. I’m looking for “Truth” not “the Truth[tm]”.
From my perspective, the Spirit nutures all branches of Christianity, recogizing that humans are fragmented. Fragmented people perceive things differently, even spirituality. So the Comforter runs a spiritual “baskin robbins” if you will… lots of flavors. Rome only like to offer variations on vanilla (from my perspective).
I am a very logical, rational person. I’m a CPA, for goodness sake! I don’t think the Roman Church has a monopoly on “truth” or “the Truth” and that is not something which is swayed by argument. I follow my heart… my soul.
Peace,
John
p.s. - as to the “Sacrifice” of the Mass, I don’t mind if others view it as such. I have a lot of negative baggage from all my 49 years with the church and 13 years of education by religious. I’ll sing the theology of the Cross, but I won’t call Eucharist a “sacrifice”.
M
MariaG
Guest
Wow, as a chocolate lover, I find the Catholic Church to be triple chocolate, brownie fudge ice cream. The churches I came from were more like Vanilla with a chocolate swirl. Both flavors satisfy your chocolate craving but the triple fudge is just a fuller and richer flavor. 
M
MariaG
Guest
Personally, every person without fail who I have met who was “raised Catholic” has then said why, stated something false, and not a real teaching of the Catholic church. (worship Mary, I don’t have to go throught the saints, idol worship etc.) So I can say from a personal perspective, the people who have said to me that “I was raised Catholic”, left because they did not really know the faith in the first place.
- Status