This just really angered me

  • Thread starter Thread starter twosweetgirls
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You are very confused. Those who do not follow what the Magisterium teaches only call themselves Catholic. Those who go against the Magisterium are not Catholic.
Click to expand...
Fine: Then choose from one of these. The differences between the various Catholic churches below can be compared to the same types of differences found among the varioius Protestant Christian churches that you speak about.

ANTIOCHIAN CHURCH
  1. EAST SYRIAN
    Chaldean
    Syro-Malabarese .
  2. WEST SYRIAN
    Maronite
    Syriac
    Malankarese
    ALEXANDRIAN CHURCH
    Coptic
    Ethiopian/Abyssinian
    BYZANTINE CHURCH
  3. ARMENIAN
  4. BYZANTINE
Albanian
Belarussian/Byelorussian
Bulgarian

Czech
Krizevci
Greek
Hungarian
Melkite
Romanian
Russian
Ruthenian
Slovak
Ukrainian

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE WESTERN AND EASTERN CHURCHES

Sacraments

Eastern Catholic Churches administer the Sacrament of Confirmation at Baptism The Western Church confirms its members at various ages (commonly age 12-15 in the US)

Holy Days/Feast Days Held in Importance in the Eastern Churches

Lent begins on the Monday of the week of Ash Wednesday, not Ash Wednesday itself
St. George the Martyr - April 23
Protection of Our Lady - October 1
St. Nicholas - December 6

Religious Symbols

Mosaics and icons are the common adornment to Churches and homes in the Eastern Church, while the Western Church has preferred the usage of statues.

Theologians

Western Church Fathers focused and speculated on ethical problems, sin, free will, grace, satisfaction and justification
Eastern Church Fathers only used philosophy when revealed truths were attacked from within in heresy/error, or from outside in dealing with pagan philosophy. Occasionally used rules of deductive reasoning but always stressed Faith, which was considered the highest philosophy.

The Cross

Western Church uses single horizontal bar to symbolize the Cross Christ was crucified on
Eastern Church uses three horizontal bars (longest in the middle) to symbolize:
Top bar: Plate hung by Pilate reading INRI (“Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews”) in Latin, Greek and Hebrew
Middle bar: The wood of the Cross carried by Christ
Lower bar: Footrest on a cross (which only causes more pain when used by one who is crucified); later slanted
Use of the three-barrred Cross is very ancient, appearing in an icon of Our Lady of the Passion (one of the oldest icons)

Fasting

In the West:

Form of fasting was typically reducing amount of food consumed, due to bland, non-varied meals from day to day.
Normal day in the West was having two full meals; fasting days had one full meal and one lighter meal.
For a majority of Western Church members, meat (and even fish) was not common to see on the dinner plate.
Abstain from meat every Friday during the year.
Fast (depending on your normal meals) on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday
In the East:
Form was actually an “abstinence” from favorite kinds foods, since the Eastern economy was much wealthier and had a larger variety of foods.
Abstain from certain foods every Friday during the year (similar to the Roman Church)
Strict Fast on first Monday of Lent, Good Friday and Holy Saturday (no foods that contain animal products OR come from animals, such as eggs, milk, cheese and butter)

Married Clergy:

Not a single ‘practicing’ priest in the Church has EVER married; there have only been instances of married men who later became ordained. If a priest were to leave the Priesthood and later married, it is a different situation since the priest has had his faculties (ability to administer sacraments) suspended by the Church when he left the Priesthood.

In the West:

Due to various reasons, the Western Church instituted the discipline of only unmarried men being ordained (except for some Protestants who have entered the Church in recent years)
In the early years of the Church, it was difficult to find a single man in his 40-50s who would make a good Bishop: therefore, some married men were consecrated Bishops. However, married clergy in both Rites have always followed guidelines concerning conjugal relations between themselves and their spouses and the celebration of the Mass, etc. In addition, both Rites have always mandated that if a married priest is consecrated a Bishop, he must live like “brother and sister” with his wife.

In the East:

Except for the decision of the Holy Father for only unmarried men to be ordained in the Eastern Catholic Church in the US and Canada, the Eastern Church has always allowed the possibility of married men being ordained to the Priesthood.
 
Bishops do discipline priests who are not following the Church. There already is a system in place. It is the Code of Canon Law.
Click to expand...
Right - and that’s what’s really shocking. Given the recent sex abuse scandals in the Catholic Church, we find not one Bishop that has been brought to justice by their own governing body regarding their part in the crimes. We do find priests that have paid the price, but Bishops who knew of the crimes, hid the evidence, worked to move priests around the world to avoid prosecution, and who actually worked to counter and silence(sometimes criminally) those who were accusing the church of those unspeakable acts have never been brought to justice. But they do a fine job of disciplining the priests - no argument there.

The title of this thread, and its original point on how one of you was “angered” because Protestant churches weren’t “getting it right”, and declared their position against certain Catholic teachings as somehow showing their inaccurate view of God - makes me ill. How dare you get angered at anything. You’d be better off spending your time getting “angry” at your church leadership, and then making your anger known to them.
 
Just because churches in different places practice a little differently doesn’t mean they aren’t Catholic. As long as they follow the Magisterium, they are within the Catholic Church. The different rites are all within the Catholic Church. Eastern Catholic churches still follow the Magisterium and they only differ on cultural traditions, not on dogmatically defined issues.
 
mepatri said:
Right - and that’s what’s really shocking. Given the recent sex abuse scandals in the Catholic Church, we find not one Bishop that has been brought to justice by their own governing body regarding their part in the crimes. We do find priests that have paid the price, but Bishops who knew of the crimes, hid the evidence, worked to move priests around the world to avoid prosecution, and who actually worked to counter and silence(sometimes criminally) those who were accusing the church of those unspeakable acts have never been brought to justice. But they do a fine job of disciplining the priests - no argument there.

The title of this thread, and its original point on how one of you was “angered” because Protestant churches weren’t “getting it right”, and declared their position against certain Catholic teachings as somehow showing their inaccurate view of God - makes me ill. How dare you get angered at anything. You’d be better off spending your time getting “angry” at your church leadership, and then making your anger known to them.
Click to expand...
Who promised you that every single bishop is always sinless? Who promised you a church of perfect people? Just because someone is a bishop doesn’t mean they are perfect. You make the mistake of saying that we accept them doing bad things. We in no way do this!
 
TheApologist said:
There’s nothing wrong with having more than one Catholic(or any other denomination for that matter) church within a mile of each other. When this happens, I ask these questions…
  1. Is one of the churches regularly full in one of the Masses?
  2. Does one church have particularly good music or architecture/sculptures/art?
  3. Was one of the churches built a very long time after the first was? Was this due to overflowing of the first church?
  4. Were both churches built at the same time? Was it out of fear that one wouldn’t be enough for the locals?
  5. Does one of the churches have a particularly good speaker, particularly comforting priest, paticularly good laity programs/activities?
  6. Does one church refuse to stop liturgical abuses?
I’m sure you all could come up with many more. If it’s out of sheer competition, then they probably should just merge and have more property, volunteers, and just plain more!
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I work in commercial real estate. May I continue your question with … "Were these churches built here along this street because of zoning laws and restrictions …? 🙂

To address the initial concern: I am a devout Catholic; my best friend is a Missouri Synod Lutheran. We argue the real presence and the Lord’s body and blood WITH the bread and wine and the Catholic truth of Jesus’ body, blood, soul and divinity under THE APPEARANCE of bread and wine all the time. Suffice it to say, I am fairly certain that outright rejection of the pamphlet isn’t what the Missouri Synod Lutherans hold as a tenant of their faith. (They’re still wrong on trans vs. cons.) 🙂
 
Just because churches in different places practice a little differently doesn’t mean they aren’t Catholic. As long as they follow the Magisterium, they are within the Catholic Church. The different rites are all within the Catholic Church. Eastern Catholic churches still follow the Magisterium and they only differ on cultural traditions, not on dogmatically defined issues.
Click to expand...
Now you’re getting it! Just as long as the various denominations don’t stray off the basic tenets of the Bible, they are free to exist as Christian churches. It’s when they stray from central doctrines of the Christian faith that they part ways.

For instance - I can walk into a Baptist church and still worship with them. We may differ on how to baptize, or how we each celebrate communioin, but as long as we stay on track Biblically, we have no issues. This is what you see among most of the “denominations” - and these are the types of differences you see amongst the various Catholic churches I pointed out. No divisional issues, just issues of practice. This is where we see Baptists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc… They argree on the central message of the Gospel. It’s unfair to characterize them as being “weak” or fractured, for the same reasons that it would be unfair to do so to the various Catholic rites or “denominations” I listed.
 
mepatri said:
Now you’re getting it! Just as long as the various denominations don’t stray off the basic tenets of the Bible, they are free to exist as Christian churches. It’s when they stray from central doctrines of the Christian faith that they part ways.

For instance - I can walk into a Baptist church and still worship with them. We may differ on how to baptize, or how we each celebrate communioin, but as long as we stay on track Biblically, we have no issues. This is what you see among most of the “denominations” - and these are the types of differences you see amongst the various Catholic churches I pointed out. No divisional issues, just issues of practice. This is where we see Baptists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc… They argree on the central message of the Gospel. It’s unfair to characterize them as being “weak” or fractured, for the same reasons that it would be unfair to do so to the various Catholic rites or “denominations” I listed.
Click to expand...
Uhh, not really. They differ on issues of dogma and doctrine. They are not Catholic. Yes you may worship with them, but that’s pretty much the only thing you can do with them at their service(you should remember some of the songs they use spout dogamatic and doctrinal error).

EDIT:
Also, there’s a difference from being in full communion with the Catholic Church and not being in full communion with the Catholic Church. All of the rites are. Almost none of the Protestants are.

EDIT 2:
Dogmatic and doctrinal issues are divisional issues. Those who do not follow the Magisterium are not Catholic and should not be acting as if they are.
 
Who promised you that every single bishop is always sinless? Who promised you a church of perfect people? Just because someone is a bishop doesn’t mean they are perfect. You make the mistake of saying that we accept them doing bad things. We in no way do this!
Click to expand...
Who said anything about them having to be sinless? However, I’d venture to say that if one of your sons was raped by a Catholic Bishop or priest, you’d see it differently.

It’s not what they did, but how your leadership dealt with what they did that counts - and they basically did nothing. It’s about how they covered it up, and when caught, still didn’t do anything to the upper level leadership. Doesn’t that bother you? It’s not just “a few bad apples”… When you find a barrell full of bad apples, you clean out the barrell.

I’m sure you don’t accept it, but it looks like your leadership, those at the top, are willing to minimize the crimes by not taking the correct actions to clean it up.

Anyway - this is way off topic. Sorry - but I had to blow off a little steam seeing a thread that has the guts to be angered at something as silly as the denominations of other churches while it self-righteously pats itself on the back for its “unity”, all the while ingoring the more serious issues.
 
mepatri said:
Who said anything about them having to be sinless? However, I’d venture to say that if one of your sons was raped by a Catholic Bishop or priest, you’d see it differently.

It’s not what they did, but how your leadership dealt with what they did that counts - and they basically did nothing. It’s about how they covered it up, and when caught, still didn’t do anything to the upper level leadership. Doesn’t that bother you? It’s not just “a few bad apples”… When you find a barrell full of bad apples, you clean out the barrell.

I’m sure you don’t accept it, but it looks like your leadership, those at the top, are willing to minimize the crimes by not taking the correct actions to clean it up.

Anyway - this is way off topic. Sorry - but I had to blow off a little steam seeing a thread that has the guts to be angered at something as silly as the denominations of other churches while it self-righteously pats itself on the back for its “unity”, all the while ingoring the more serious issues.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, you have no idea how many corrupted priests did those terrible things, how much the upper church dealth with them, or any of it.

If I had a relative that was raped by a priest, then I would see it as I see now. I would try to get those priest changed. I want them changed right now anyway. Just because there’s a few bad priest, you think the entire church is rotten? (a few fish…barrel full) That’s terribly ignorant.

Also this thread is about how ridiculus it is to have several churches of one denomination near each other…NOT what you said before.
 
Uhh, not really. They differ on issues of dogma and doctrine. They are not Catholic. Yes you may worship with them, but that’s pretty much the only thing you can do with them at their service(you should remember some of the songs they use spout dogamatic and doctrinal error).
Click to expand...
  1. Not all of them.
  2. The word Catholic means very little, since there are many varieties of “Catholic” churches. In fact, if you do a little digging, you’ll find that the Catholic Church in Rome has been very unhappy with the American Catholic Church lately. Not very “catholic” if you ask me.
  3. Maybe, I’m not a member of all of them. By the way, the same goes for various Catholic churches in my area also. They are not all in harmony.
EDIT:
Also, there’s a difference from being in full communion with the Catholic Church and not being in full communion with the Catholic Church. All of the rites are. Almost none of the Protestants are.
Click to expand...
The American Catholic Church is not always in “full communion” with Rome. An example would be Rome’s instance that the Amercian church modify its missile to be in accordance with Rome’s. A recent meeting of Catholic Bishops in our area met to discuss this very matter.
EDIT 2:
Dogmatic and doctrinal issues are divisional issues. Those who do not follow the Magisterium are not Catholic and should not be acting as if they are.
Click to expand...
That’s your opinion. Self declaration of what others should be doing is not very convincing.
 
TheApologist said:
Mhmmm…like what?
Click to expand...
No, no. I was just being facetious. In most suburban areas relgious buildings are kept to certain “zones,” hence every suburban neighborhood has a “church row,” in the States. It does make it easier for the confused to “church-hop,” as they can do it all, generally, by foot …

But I digress from the thread, I think, by even bringing up something in amusement … Continue with your points of contention. So far, I’m with ya. 🙂
 
mepatri said:
  1. Not all of them.
  2. The word Catholic means very little, since there are many varieties of “Catholic” churches. In fact, if you do a little digging, you’ll find that the Catholic Church in Rome has been very unhappy with the American Catholic Church lately. Not very “catholic” if you ask me.
  3. Maybe, I’m not a member of all of them. By the way, the same goes for various Catholic churches in my area also. They are not all in harmony.
Click to expand...
Can you please clarify what number is responding to what statement of mine?
The American Catholic Church is not always in “full communion” with Rome. An example would be Rome’s instance that the Amercian church modify its missile to be in accordance with Rome’s. A recent meeting of Catholic Bishops in our area met to discuss this very matter.
Click to expand...
The American Catholic Church is in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. It is a part of the Roman Catholic Church. If somehow the American Catholic Church were not being in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, then serious action would be taken immediately.
That’s your opinion. Self declaration of what others should be doing is not very convincing.
Click to expand...
And what is your self declaration of the definition of “divisional” issues?
 
Was I dismayed–and angered, really–to read the pamphlet on communion which stated “We reject and condemn the Real Presence” along with other “we reject and condemn” statements.
Click to expand...
You shouldn’t be. Think of it this way, in their belief system they are professing something and consider it heresy to believe otherwise ergo they condemn them. This will apply not only to catholics but also to other protestants who have broken from them.

You will find the same type of statements in the Council of Trent where we call particular things anathema because we don’t believe them to apostolic nor faithful to the gospel. Why? Because we think they are dangerous to peoples spiritual health and endanger the soul and as stewards we have the obligation to protect the deposit of faith.

Vatican II restates them in a more positive and ecumenical fashion as to what we believe but without the harsher language of anathema. Of course anathema and “reject and condemn” don’t carry the same weight nor connotation, the former in line with repentance and reconciliation, but the gist and principle is still the same.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene
 
Excuse me, you have no idea how many corrupted priests did those terrible things, how much the upper church dealth with them, or any of it.
Click to expand...
Sure I do. Where have you been? All the information has been fully documented by the Catholic Church. Maybe you should look it up? By the way - here’s more info. Don’t get me started on this - you won’t like what you find.

observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1020400,00.html
If I had a relative that was raped by a priest, then I would see it as I see now. I would try to get those priest changed.
Click to expand...
And just how would you do that? Would you take it to your Bishop? See the link above.

I
want them changed right now anyway. Just because there’s a few bad priest, you think the entire church is rotten? (a few fish…barrel full) That’s terribly ignorant.
Click to expand...
Feel free to call St. Paul ignorant. I’d expect that from someone who doesn’t really know what Paul said about a few bad apples.
It is widely reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of a kind not found even among pagans–a man living with his father’s wife. And you are inflated with pride. Should you not rather have been sorrowful? The one who did this deed should be expelled from your midst. I, for my part, although absent in body but present in spirit, have already, as if present, pronounced judgment on the one who has committed this deed, in the name of (our) Lord Jesus: when you have gathered together and I am with you in spirit with the power of the Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. Your boasting is not appropriate. Do you not know that a little yeast leavens all the dough? Clear out the old yeast, so that you may become a fresh batch of dough, inasmuch as you are unleavened. For our paschal lamb, Christ, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 1 Cor.5
Click to expand...
Also this thread is about how ridiculus it is to have several churches of one denomination near each other…NOT what you said before.
Click to expand...
I understand your embarassment and sadness about what the Catholic Church has done in protecting its priests. It must be hard to keep defending them. I won’t post anything further about this on this thread. I will pray for you that you see what’s going on and turn from it.
 
mepatri said:
Feel free to call St. Paul ignorant. I’d expect that from someone who doesn’t really know what Paul said about a few bad apples.
Click to expand...
What you said was that the Catholic Church was a barrel of bad fish and that it had to be clearned. St. Paul is talking about what went on BACK THEN. And I agree with him. I say that those who were involved in the scandal need to be corrected. However, this has nothing to do with you calling the entire Catholic Church a barrel of bad fish.
It must be hard to keep defending them…I will pray for you that you see what’s going on and turn from it.
Click to expand...
It’s absolutely not hard defending them. The true Catholics that is. What do you mean “turn form it” that sounds as if you are saying I endorse such behavior! I do no such thing.
 
“The American Catholic Church is not always in “full communion” with Rome. An example would be Rome’s instance that the Amercian church modify its missile to be in accordance with Rome’s. A recent meeting of Catholic Bishops in our area met to discuss this very matter.”

Mepatri,

Rome gets very upset when anybody fools around with it’s “missles.”
They are programmed to take out protestants and Mormons and various other heretics and any tampering could cause them to seek out Jehovah’s Witnesses and other low-value targets who can best be dealt with using Rosaries and Brown Scapulars. 😃
 
If the missals were doctrinally erroneous, the upper church would automatically declare the missals unusable. Just because another missal is being used does not mean the “American Catholic Church” is not in full communion with the entire Roman Catholic Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top