What about Catholics who leave the Church because they sincerely believe Catholicism isn't true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter timeandeternity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rascalking said:
Nope, it doesn’t have anything to do with “American Culture”. It has to do with “freedom”. True freedom is the choice to do what you want, you can choose good or evil.
Click to expand...
No, that is not authentic freedom. Authentic freedom is freedom to choose the good.

Is a fish more free in or out of the water?
 
1ke said:
No, that is not authentic freedom. Authentic freedom is freedom to choose the good.

Is a fish more free in or out of the water?
Click to expand...
1ke, that fish analogy makes no sense.

It’s clear where we disagree. We could on in circles for hours about this.

God bless.
 
timeandeternity said:
I’m having trouble understanding exactly what the Church teaches on people who have left the Catholic Church. I know that if someone rejects the faith, knowing what they are doing, they are condemned. But I get confused when it comes to people who quite sincerely come to believe that Catholicism is not the fullness of truth, and so they leave because they have very honestly (though incorrectly) come to the conclusion that the Catholic Church is not what she says she is.

Of course, if you’re taking about people who decide to leave because of emotional reasons, and then conform their reasoning to their emotions to justify their decision, that’s a whole other situation. However, there are some people (and I’ve known a few of these) who truly think they’ve discovered that Catholicism isn’t right, so they leave. They know that the Church says that to leave means that you’re condemned, but they quite honestly don’t believe that the Church has spiritual authority. Does anyone know what the Catholic position is on the status of such people?
Click to expand...
I have heard more than once from apologists on Catholic radio that if one believes Catholicism to be untrue, it is his responsibility to leave the Church.
 
I believe in the “once a catholic always a catholic” statement, but for a different reason to that given. As someone who stopped going to church, considered other faiths ( due to pains I wont go into now) I found my way back home. I dont consider myself reverted/reconverted simply because I have always known in my heart of hearts that I am Catholic. I was baptised, recieved first forgiveness, Holy communion and confirmation. Once an individual takes God into their heart he never ever leaves them, even though at times they may want him to, hence once a catholic always a catholic.

God bless you all xxxx
 
Rascalking said:
My point is very clear. It cheapens MY choice to be Catholic when you say “Once Catholic, always Catholic.” It makes “free will” (that God gave us) look as though it doesn’t exist.
Click to expand...
Cheapens your choice??? Give us a break. What kind of attitude is that about your faith?
In fact what is a Catholic Mormon? You can’t be both!
 
thistle said:
Cheapens your choice??? Give us a break. What kind of attitude is that about your faith?
In fact what is a Catholic Mormon? You can’t be both!
Click to expand...
Fondest regards to you as well Thistle.Love you too. How charming.

A Catholic Mormon is my way of trying to lighten people up about religion. Doesn’t it work well? I’m 100 percent Catholic, just like you. I have a sense of humor though. Also, I’m British born as well, but I don’t live in the Philippines.

I disagree, I think it cheapens my free will. You disagree with me. Loudly and impolitely I might add.
 
Rascalking said:
Fondest regards to you as well Thistle.Love you too. How charming.

A Catholic Mormon is my way of trying to lighten people up about religion. Doesn’t it work well? I’m 100 percent Catholic, just like you. I have a sense of humor though. Also, I’m British born as well, but I don’t live in the Philippines.

I disagree,** I think it cheapens my free will. You disagree with me.** Loudly and impolitely I might add.
Click to expand...
I certainly do disagree with you. I think that makes a mockery of our faith.

Does having to obey the Church teachings also cheapen your free will?
 
DaddyGirl said:
Rascal,
I’m liking the sound of this Cath-Morm thing.
Let’s start a new religion!
Click to expand...
Does that mean we can marry more than one spouse, yet still have the Mass and believe we’ll become the god of our own planet after death?? Count me in!
 
thistle said:
I certainly do disagree with you. I think that makes a mockery of our faith.

Does having to obey the Church teachings also cheapen your free will?
Click to expand...
I’m pulling the immature thing and not talking to you until you apologize for rudeness in other posts.

If you don’t, then great. That’s your “free will” 😛

This is going to be the start of a beautiful friendship, I can feel it. Can you?
 
mark_a said:
I have heard more than once from apologists on Catholic radio that if one believes Catholicism to be untrue, it is his responsibility to leave the Church.
Click to expand...
If this were stated on Catholic radio, I would hope someone contacted the management of the station so the “apologist” could be instructed not to teach contrary to the Faith.
 
Rascalking said:
1ke, that fish analogy makes no sense.

It’s clear where we disagree. We could on in circles for hours about this.

God bless.
Click to expand...
A fish in the water may swim anywhere and do anything. He is alive. So too are we when we are operating within God’s law.

A fish outside the water is dead. A fish who chooses to jump out of the water is a dead fish. So too our souls when we choose to operate outside God’s law.
 
Rascalking said:
My point is very clear. It cheapens MY choice to be Catholic when you say “Once Catholic, always Catholic.” It makes “free will” (that God gave us) look as though it doesn’t exist.
Click to expand...
A fish doesn’t choose to be a fish or not a fish. He chooses to be a live fish or a dead fish (in water/out of water).

The choice of whether or not to incorporate you into the Body of Christ was your parents’ to make. Once they did, your choice is to be a live fish (Christian following God’s law) or a dead one (Christian rejecting God’s law).
 
Can we go back to the main topic now? I think we are drifting somewhat.
 
rom422 said:
I think we should start by defining our terms.
Click to expand...
The only terms that matter with regards to Catholicism are the terms defined by the Catholic Church. The Church teaches that once someone is Baptised, an indelible mark is made on their soul and that makes the person Catholic forever, regardless of how they feel about it, regardless of whether or not they agreed to it, etc. If the indelible mark of Baptism exists on the person, then that person is claimed by the Church as Catholic. This is a teaching of the Church.

The Church teaches that when one is excommunicated, they are not allowed to receive Communion until they confess and obtain absolution. The Church teaches that despite being excommunicated, a person is obligated to fulfill their Catholic reponsibilities, such as attending Sunday Mass and honoring holy days of obligation, etc. Excommunication does not mean that one is not Catholic or that one is excluded from membership in the Church. This is contrary to Church teaching.
 
1ke said:
A fish doesn’t choose to be a fish or not a fish. He chooses to be a live fish or a dead fish (in water/out of water).

The choice of whether or not to incorporate you into the Body of Christ was your parents’ to make. Once they did, your choice is to be a live fish (Christian following God’s law) or a dead one (Christian rejecting God’s law).
Click to expand...
Is the same true for Muslims, Hindus, etc? I don’t consider myself permanently defiled by a religion just because my parents “chose” it for me.
 
Rence said:
The only terms that matter with regards to Catholicism are the terms defined by the Catholic Church. The Church teaches that once someone is Baptised, an indelible mark is made on their soul and that makes the person Catholic forever, regardless of how they feel about it, regardless of whether or not they agreed to it, etc. If the indelible mark of Baptism exists on the person, then that person is claimed by the Church as Catholic. This is a teaching of the Church.

The Church teaches that when one is excommunicated, they are not allowed to receive Communion until they confess and obtain absolution. The Church teaches that despite being excommunicated, a person is obligated to fulfill their Catholic reponsibilities, such as attending Sunday Mass and honoring holy days of obligation, etc. Excommunication does not mean that one is not Catholic or that one is excluded from membership in the Church. This is contrary to Church teaching.
Click to expand...
I do not know where you got your information. If you got it from the Wikipedia, then the information is incorrect. For a more reliable information, see the Catholic Encyclopedia. I gave a link in Post #18 above. But here it is again: newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm
 
thistle said:
I certainly do disagree with you. I think that makes a mockery of our faith.

Does having to obey the Church teachings also cheapen your free will?
Click to expand...
Honest question to thistle-why are you so worked up like this? I think your trying to convibce yourself your right, not all of us.

Of course you won’t admit it, but I think you may be weak in your own faith and the ideaof someone not agreeing with you troubles you so much.

your in my prayers. I hope yoy don’t live your life like this…
 
Rence said:
The Church teaches that once someone is Baptised, an indelible mark is made on their soul and that makes the person Catholic forever, regardless of how they feel about it, regardless of whether or not they agreed to it, etc. If the indelible mark of Baptism exists on the person, then that person is claimed by the Church as Catholic. This is a teaching of the Church.
Click to expand...
Let me tell you why I doubt that very much. Consider a man baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church, a schismatic church. The Catholic Church considers their sacraments, including baptism, as valid, in spite of the fact that the Eastern Orthodox Church is schismatic. Now, when this man is baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church, is he then considered a Catholic just because he received a valid baptism? I don’t think so. He becomes a Christian because of that baptism, yes, and that leaves an indelible mark. But he remains a non-Catholic. To become a Catholic, or a member of the visible Catholic Church, he still has to make the necessary steps to be in communion with the Catholic Church, but he does not need to be baptized again because his original baptism was valid.

Suppose now that he was admitted into the Catholic Church and becomes a Catholic, but later decides to leave the Catholic Church and was excommunicated. In that unfortunate event, he loses his status as a member of the Catholic Church, is it not? So, it is not true to say that “once a Catholic, always a Catholic.”

Now, suppose that this man, instead of being baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church, is baptized in the Catholic Church. In that case he does not merely become a Christian, but he also becomes automatically a bona fide member of the Catholic Church. But this does not mean that he cannot lose this status of being a Catholic. If he leaves the Church, for example, and becomes a protestant, then I think he ceases to be a Catholic; that means, he ceases to be a member in good standing of that ecclesiastical body known as “The Catholic Church.”

Whenever I speak of the “Catholic Church,” I am referring only to the visible Church of Christ on earth. Therefore, do not confuse it with the “mystical Body of Christ,” or the greater “Church of Christ.” The Church of Christ, or the Mystical Body of Christ, has a far wider membership. It includes the Church Triumphant (consisting of the saints in heaven), the Church Suffering (consisting of the souls in purgatory), and the Church Militant (which consists of those members of the mystical Body that are still on earth). The Church Militant, in turn, consists of the visible Catholic Church (of which the Roman Pontiff is the visible Head), and those non-catholics who, though not baptized in the Catholic Church through no fault of their own, are living out virtuous lives, and who accept Christ as their Lord and Savior, and who are therefore regarded as “invisible members” also of the One True Church of Christ.

Going back to the question posted by the original OP, I say that if a Catholic honestly believes that the Catholic Church is not the true Church of Christ, and leaves, then he ceases to be a Catholic - that means, he ceases to be a member of the visible Catholic Church. But if he is honestly in error, and he is not guilty of negligence in the pursuit of the truth, and provided he still accepts Christ as his Lord and Savior, then he could still be considered an “invisible member,” or part, of the Mystical Body (or Church) of Christ.

Of course, all the above is just my opinion. If you think that I have been in error somewhere, please indicate a reliable source that we can both fall back on to resolve the issue. I am not a priest or a canon lawyer, just a plain catholic like most of us in this forum. Please don’t be mad when I disagree. You, too, are most welcome to disagree with me. We can agree to disagree.

God bless!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top