What are the reasons I should (or shouldn't) become Catholic?

[SELASSIE]

Eastern Orthodox?
Catholic Clergy Pedophilia is Raging right now.
By FAR the highest number of rape and molestation cases .
( How many sick priests did Bene. Hide to get his job?)
Satan has gone out and decieved MANY,
but how come the Catholic clergy demonstrate
these evils THE MOST?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

OFF TOPIC REPLY: The University of Chicago: Where fun goes to die.

Now back to your regularly scheduled topic.

AAAAAH. So you’ve heard of us.

It’s never Friday at the U of C.

 

[mercygate]

Eastern Orthodox?
Catholic Clergy Pedophilia is Raging right now.
By FAR the highest number of rape and molestation cases .
( How many sick priests did Bene. Hide to get his job?)
Satan has gone out and decieved MANY,
but how come the Catholic clergy demonstrate
these evils THE MOST?

Per capita, they do not, and it is highly irresponsible to say such a thing.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Did Ignatius understand it as you do? Because between “transubstantiation” and “real presence” there is a huge variable, it is misleading to speak about “real presence” as if the term is equivalent to “transubstantiation.” Christians, who consider the bread and wine as strictly symbolical, also believe in the real presence of the Lord among them. Jesus said: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). Surely Christ is present in the congregation of His people, as He promises, especially during the celebration of the Supper. His presence is real even though it is spiritual and not carnal. I don’t believe even with Ignatius words you can differentiate, that would be reading more into the text than is there.

I’m not Latin, so I don’t have the Transubstatiation albatros around my neck.

I like, and I am sure St. Ignatius along with Apostles, would appreciate and agree with the “Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity” line, and you, and the gnostics, wouldn’t.

Since the gnostics were at least consistent St. Ignatius went into that Christ WAS incarnated, took flesh of a women, WAS a man, DID suffer Crucifixion, etc. in some detail. So, no, there is no question of the correct reading of the text. Read them for yourself (shouldn’t take more than a half hour or so).

 

[Mannyfit75]

Tell lies somewhere else.
If you never heard this, you have not studied christ’s life.
Distorted to you, maybe.
How come the Eastern Orthodox Priests don’t have Catholic Styled problems ?
(like Catholic Priests’ worldwide RAPING of children by the 10’s of thousands in the last 50 years alone)
If you know nothings of the African Origins of Scriptures, well May the Author of All Life and Light
have mercy on your stiff neck and hard heart.

Don’t join a church that has THOUSANDS of
Child Rapists in it’s Employ.

The sex abuse scandal was committed by the minority of priests consider the fact the there are 44,000 priests in the Catholic Church in the US.

Episcopalian and Professor of History and Religious Studies at Penn State University, published the book Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis in 1996. In it, he calculated that approximately 0.2 percent of Catholic priests are child molesters.[18] His 2002 article “The myth of the ‘pedophile priest’”[19] expresses his views. In contrast to Louise Haggett’s statement, Professor Jenkins states:

“My research of cases over the past 20 years indicates no evidence whatever that Catholic or other celibate clergy are any more likely to be involved in misconduct or abuse than clergy of any other denomination – or indeed, than non clergy. However determined news media may be to see this affair as a crisis of celibacy, the charge is just unsupported.”

These alleged abuses only count 0.2 percent of the entire clergy.

The John Jay Report, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, found accusations against 4,392 priests in the USA, equalling about 4% of all U.S. priests. Figures supplied by the Catholic League, and the U. S. Department of Education suggest that the abuse figures in the Catholic Church are similar to abuse in other institutions such as education.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

Second, I like to say that the sex scandal is not limited to the Catholic Church. The media bias against the Catholic Church has proven this so by blowing it out of proposition. The crimes which these priest have committed is gross immorality, and will be actions will be taken against them.

Though it sadden me deeply that the victims made themselves worst as the molesters themselves by profiting by suing the diocese of money. Money which can be use for religious education and providing religious service. Two evil does not make right.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Per capita, they do not, and it is highly irresponsible to say such a thing.

I’m assuming, Selassie [btw, the name means “Trinity”] that you are Orthodox.

As a fellow communicant, I would ask you not to bear false witness.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

The sex abuse scandal was committed by the minority of priests consider the fact the there are 44,000 priests in the Catholic Church in the US.

Episcopalian and Professor of History and Religious Studies at Penn State University, published the book Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis in 1996. In it, he calculated that approximately 0.2 percent of Catholic priests are child molesters.[18] His 2002 article “The myth of the ‘pedophile priest’”[19] expresses his views. In contrast to Louise Haggett’s statement, Professor Jenkins states:

“My research of cases over the past 20 years indicates no evidence whatever that Catholic or other celibate clergy are any more likely to be involved in misconduct or abuse than clergy of any other denomination – or indeed, than non clergy. However determined news media may be to see this affair as a crisis of celibacy, the charge is just unsupported.”

These alleged abuses only count 0.2 percent of the entire clergy.

The John Jay Report, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, found accusations against 4,392 priests in the USA, equalling about 4% of all U.S. priests. Figures supplied by the Catholic League, and the U. S. Department of Education suggest that the abuse figures in the Catholic Church are similar to abuse in other institutions such as education.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

Second, I like to say that the sex scandal is not limited to the Catholic Church. The media bias against the Catholic Church has proven this so by blowing it out of proposition. The crimes which these priest have committed is gross immorality, and will be actions will be taken against them.

Though it sadden me deeply that the victims made themselves worst as the molesters themselves by profiting by suing the diocese of money. Money which can be use for religious education and providing religious service. Two evil does not make right.

Studies show that the clergy most guilty are a Protestant group (which I won’t name, just to say not the Episcopalian) who don’t have celibate clergy at all.

Studies also show that school teachers (my profession) are among the worst. Not clergy.

 

[mercygate]

I’m assuming, Selassie [btw, the name means “Trinity”] that you are Orthodox.

As a fellow communicant, I would ask you not to bear false witness.

I am not bearing false witness. The numbers do not skew towards Catholic priests when the totality of child/adolescent sex abuse cases are brought to light. This is not a “Roman” blight nor is it numerically related to celibacy. The largest number of cases are among school teachers, not among clergy of any stripe.

See Manny’s citation.

 

[BOBKAT]

Nothing judgemental there, furthermore Kathleen if I wonder but don’t inquire whether someone is saved how am I fulfilling the great commision. People dangerously over use and misuse the Judge not lest yee be judged, we are called to be fruit inspectors.

Paul says work OUT not work ON your salvation. Christ gave us the diamond already we just need to work it out of the mine!

I know what judgement is allowed and what is not. We need to judge behaviors not hearts and as for working out or working on you salavation with fear and trembling I see no real difference. Even Mother Theresa hoped to go to heaven she never thought she was automaticly saved and she not only loved our Lord, but showed it everyday of her life. I will take my que from her and Paul and work on it and work it out in fear and trembling in the hope that I too will share in the glory. You see I like to give people hope not false promises with words and it is in the hope that we find what needs to be done not in the absolute. Not only is Jesus my Lord and Savior I pray always to love Him as I should, yet I don’t have that absolute feeling of salvation, but I do have something pretty wonderful and that is hope, hope in Jesus, hope in His mercy, and that is what makes me keep trying. I pray that your absolute is an absolute.

God Bless

 

[Mannyfit75]

Studies show that the clergy most guilty are a Protestant group (which I won’t name, just to say not the Episcopalian) who don’t have celibate clergy at all.

Studies also show that school teachers (my profession) are among the worst. Not clergy.

Exactly. It isn’t a Catholic issue it’s a social issue. It really pisses me off when one sees a priest they assume that he is a molesters. Since I am considering the priesthood myself after my career in the Army.

To some individuals who insist on this scandal have nothing more than a agenda against the Catholic Church. Scandal itself is not new in the Church. Since Biblical times, Jesus had an apostle who betrayed him (Judas) and an Apostle who denied him three (St. Peter) times. Another persecuted and killed Christians, and then converted (St Paul). Does this make this that Jesus wasn’t the Messiah? No.

Men are sinners due to the sin of one man (Adam). The Church has members who are sinners. The Church has a human nature and a divine nature. It is divine because God’s grace flows through it. It is human because its members are human.

 

[Church_Militant]

Did Ignatius understand it as you do? Because between “transubstantiation” and “real presence” there is a huge variable, it is misleading to speak about “real presence” as if the term is equivalent to “transubstantiation.”

I disagree. The two terms are the same concept in Catholic theology, since without transubstantiation there can be no Real Presence in the Eucharist. Transubstantiation is actually just a 50 cent term created to help define how that Real Presence happens and what it is.

There is no “huge variable” that you speak of and “it is “more” misleading to speak about” it as you have than to keep it where it belongs in the context of Catholic teaching.

Christians, who consider the bread and wine as strictly symbolical, also believe in the real presence of the Lord among them.

This is actually irrelevant to the actual Catholic teaching for a couple of reasons MfM.

1. “Christians, who consider the bread and wine as strictly symbolical” are not in line with either the teachings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, the New Testament, nor the teachings of the Catholic Church for the last 2,000 years.
2. “also believe in the real presence of the Lord among them.”, but this, as you go on to explain below,

Jesus said: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). Surely Christ is present in the congregation of His people, as He promises, especially during the celebration of the Supper. His presence is real even though it is spiritual and not carnal.

…is a completely different aspect of the presence of Christ and according to both scripture and the writings of the early church (as cited above) is not what they were speaking of when they speak of the Eucharist.

I don’t believe even with Ignatius words you can differentiate, that would be reading more into the text than is there.

IMO this is wishful thinking based upon a 500 year old agenda to divert people from the actual teachings of the New Testament and the early church because after the initial generations of priests who fell away with the reformers, the valid capacity to confect (consecrate) the Eucharist was lost, and the reformers no doubt knew that.

As a result, in order to give their new religion some semblance of credence, they actually had to concoct this belief system, or else admit that they were teaching a new wind of doctrine of men. Otherwise, they’re out of business with people who know what the early church and the New Testament teaches, before they really even begin as opposed to this new teaching concerning communion.

 

[boppaid]

The whole Epistle to the Hebrews contrasts the Levitical Priesthood, with its animal sacrifices, against the One perfect Sacrifice of Jesus Christ: once for all. It is that SAME sacrifice into which the Sacrifice of the Mass enters – as it were, the veil of time and space being rent as we are united at the foot of the Cross and partake of the eternal Sacrifice offered by Christ to the Father.

This always confuses me. WHere in scripture does it say this? Because, to me (as a Catholic) it seems like a resacrifice to me. It always has seemed as such. I’ve heard it said before about time and space, etc., but that always seemed like double talk. (I’m not saying it is, just how it always came across to me.)

Can you explain this to me?

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Church Militant,

Maybe you can take a stab at my question since no one else answered it and you don’t usually dodge or twist from things.

Why didn’t the ones who understood Christ in John 6 as you guys claim “literally” stay and grab a hunk of flesh so as to have eternal life, people have desired the path to everylasting life both spiritually and in flesh for millenia…

 

[Palladio]

Church Militant,

Maybe you can take a stab at my question since no one else answered it and you don’t usually dodge or twist from things.

Why didn’t the ones who understood Christ in John 6 as you guys claim “literally” stay and grab a hunk of flesh so as to have eternal life, people have desired the path to everylasting life both spiritually and in flesh for millenia…

I can answer that: because they had brains in their heads and used them.

 

[estesbob]

Did Ignatius understand it as you do? Because between “transubstantiation” and “real presence” there is a huge variable, it is misleading to speak about “real presence” as if the term is equivalent to “transubstantiation.” Christians, who consider the bread and wine as strictly symbolical, also believe in the real presence of the Lord among them. Jesus said: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). Surely Christ is present in the congregation of His people, as He promises, especially during the celebration of the Supper. His presence is real even though it is spiritual and not carnal. I don’t believe even with Ignatius words you can differentiate, that would be reading more into the text than is there.

Any definition of real presence that does not acknowledge transubstantiation is false. It’s just as bad as calling any of the innumerable Protestant denominations a church

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Any definition of real presence that does not acknowledge transubstantiation is false. It’s just as bad as calling any of the innumerable Protestant denominations a church

Your a gem!

 

[jpasta]

Perhaps just reading all the answers in this thread will make up your mind what you should or shouldn’t do.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Thread pruned pending review by Rachel Malloy
MF

 

[myfavoritmartin]

I can answer that: because they had brains in their heads and used them.

Cop out! people have brains and still don’t choose Christ, people have brains and still sin.

 

[BOBKAT]

Church Militant,

Maybe you can take a stab at my question since no one else answered it and you don’t usually dodge or twist from things.

Why didn’t the ones who understood Christ in John 6 as you guys claim “literally” stay and grab a hunk of flesh so as to have eternal life, people have desired the path to everylasting life both spiritually and in flesh for millenia…

I will take a stab at that and this is only my opinion. The ones that stayed are the ones whose hearts where turned toward the message and with that they wanted to understand more of what He was saying so they stayed. And when Jesus ask them why they didn’t leave they told Him because they didn’t know where to go. The action of them staying was a profound statement regarding faith and trust which is the basis of Christianity. They knew there was more to what Jesus said and they were willing to trust Him.

Jesus I Trust You!!! is what it is all about.

God Bless
Kathleen