What Catholics Have To Believe

[catsrus]

Hi Reen 12, thank you for the clarification. I appreciate your time in responding to my question.
As regards us converts, I agree that we are quite enthusiastic about our faith. I began to study Catholicism about 6 + years ago and was Confirmed 8/02. I continue to be “in love” and find myself (at times) to be enthusiastic to a fault, i.e. I can be annoying!

 

[reen12]

Hi, Dave,

I gave some thought to your replies [for which I am
grateful.]

As to Korah’s rebellion, if I understand this aright,
this was in the very early period…much like Paul’s
letters to the early Christians, putting them on guard
against “false teachers.”

I believe the genuine parallel is not Korah, [early in time]
but Jesus… addressing the Pharisees [much later in time] -
for their additions to, and distortions of, the Mosaic Law.

As to:
quote: itsjustdave

It seems your disappointment is in God’s will to allow tares to make the Church appear as though it has fallen away.

It’s not a matter of “tares”, Dave.

The actual message, of Who Christ is and what
He has accomplished, has been distorted,
by the Church, through her theologians, across
the centuries [IMHO].

As I thought about a reply, I thought:
I find in this, a conundrum.

Christ clearly said: I give you [Peter] the Keys of the
Kingdom, and on you [the rock] I will build My church.
and, again:
And the gates of hell shall not *prevail *against it

And,

It is as clear to me, as anything in this life is
clear to me, that the RCC has departed from the
full meaning of Christ’s life…as given in the Pauline
epistles, and in the imagery provided in the Synoptic
gospels.

As you said, in another post, in this thread:

Logic is a wonderful characteristic. But integrity is much better

Recall, that my response to you, on logic and integrity, was:

And both, together, are better, still.

…even if it leaves me with a conundrum.

When I go before Jesus some day, I pray that He will
understand.

“Lord, they had turned Your Father’s house into something
unrecognizable, to my heart and soul and mind.”

Perhaps He will show me mercy.

Best,

reen12

 

[reen12]

Hi, catrus,

quote: catrus

Hi Reen 12, thank you for the clarification. I appreciate your time in responding to my question.
As regards us converts, I agree that we are quite enthusiastic about our faith. I began to study Catholicism about 6 + years ago and was Confirmed 8/02. I continue to be “in love” and find myself (at times) to be enthusiastic to a fault, i.e. I can be annoying!

I’m so glad for your reply.
Did you know that “enthusiaism” literally means “in God”
[en theos]

I can be annoying!

I didn’t think you were annoying.

You’re point was quite well made, and you knew,
and I* didn’t*, that leaven was generally not well
thought of, as an image, in the NT.

Thanks for making me aware of that, and for your
kind response,

God bless you richly, catsrus.

reen
[Please be aware that I am not exactly a paragon
of Catholic orthodoxy. ]

 

[Pug]

John Mazar,

Perhaps I am the only one, but I wonder, were you pulling our collective leg and giving us a good ribbing? Your post has the tone of a tease to me, a good natured tease, though, not a bad tease. If it weren’t for all the other responses, I would have assumed you were teasing. Can you clarify for us?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Reen,

As to Korah’s rebellion, if I understand this aright,
this was in the very early period…much like Paul’s
letters to the early Christians, putting them on guard
against “false teachers.”

I disagree. Korah’s rebellion (according to Num 16) was that he thought that the lawful ministers were wrong and that the holy people didn’t need them anymore. That’s what St. Jude is warning against (much later still in time, as the Epistle of Jude was written after Pentacost). Consequently, those that would usurp the authority of the pastor’s ordained by Jesus commit the sin of Korah’s rebellion anew.

I believe the genuine parallel is not Korah, [early in time]
but Jesus… addressing the Pharisees [much later in time] -
for their additions to, and distortions of, the Mosaic Law.

When Jesus Himself takes the keys and gives them to another authority, I will certainly abide by that authority. Instead I believe it wise for you to remember that Jesus told his disciples to do as the Pharisees said, as they sat on the chair of Moses. Yet, he warned them not to be hypocrites as the Pharisees were, so they were not to behave as they did. Yet, Jesus obviously wanted respect and submission to lawful ecclesial authority. Until God took the authority from the Pharisees–the power to bind and loose–and gave it to Peter and the apostles, the Pharisees were to be obeyed.

Luther was a disobedient Catholic monk who violated Heb 13:17. (In fact, he tossed Hebrews from his Bible). Luther is not Jesus. Calvin is not Jesus. Nor were they ordained as Bishops by those ordained by Jesus. All of Protestantism is built upon Korah’s rebellion, insofar as they usurped the historical authority place on earth by God to teach in his name. Instead of submitting to the prelates, as Heb 13:17 insists upon, protestantism is built upon PROTESTING against these prelates.

On the contrary, faithful Christians manifest their opinions to their prelates, charitably, without discarding Heb 13:17 like Luther et. al. Instead, they “evangelize always” in faith, hope, and charity, as St. Francis did.

Thus, your opinion that your Divinely ordained lawful Catholic authorities are wrong, is simply that… an opinion. You place more trust in it than Heb 13:17, it seems. Unless you think yourself infallible, such opinions do not justify contradicting GOD’S WORD as expressed in Heb 13:17. Nowhere does Heb 13:17 say that you do not have to submit to your prelates, so long as they contradict your personal theological viewpoint.

You seem to understand that the historical successors of the apostles are those who have actual historical ordination that traces back to these apostles. Yet you disregard their teachings. Based upon what? Personal opinion? St. Peter asserts that prophecy is not a matter of personal opinion. The collective opinion of the Church since the 1st century contradicts your personal opinion. Thus, all the saints of the early Church, including St. Athanasius and St. Ignatius, who knew John personally, must be wrong for you to be right.

No offense, but I side with all the saints of the past 2000 years and therefore pray that you might one day do the same.

 

[reen12]

Dear Dave,

quote: itsjustdave

Thus, all the saints of the early Church, including St. Athanasius and St. Ignatius, who knew John personally, must be wrong for you to be right.

I hide behind the Shepherd, bleating with fear.

“Lord, they had turned Your Father’s house into something
unrecognizable, to my heart and soul and mind.” [me, reen]

I’m so glad He’s here,

• in the pasture, for His sheep

reen

 

[porthos11]

Pug:

John Mazar,

Perhaps I am the only one, but I wonder, were you pulling our collective leg and giving us a good ribbing? Your post has the tone of a tease to me, a good natured tease, though, not a bad tease. If it weren’t for all the other responses, I would have assumed you were teasing. Can you clarify for us?

Weeelll, weell, weeelll, weellll. Lookie who’s back!?

Pug, you have just encounterd the famous Albert Kopsho aka MP Mazar aka Louis Mazar, and now John Mazar. All of which have been suspended with the exception of his latest incarnation.

Do a search of his posting history and you will see it’s the same thing over and over again, and just refuses to listen.

 

[John_Mazar]

exoflare, Gilbert Keith and anybody else who doubts that I am a Catholic,

I hate to break it to you guys but I am a Catholic because I was Baptized as an infant in the Catholic Church and I am a practicing Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend and I am on the membership roll of the local Catholic Church.

I do not have to believe all Catholic doctrines especially the unscriptural doctrines in order to be a good Catholic. I consider myself to be a good Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend.

 

[Mickey]

John Mazar:

I do not have to believe all Catholic doctrines especially the unscriptural doctrines in order to be a good Catholic.

This is the way I have always understood it:

If you do not accept all the doctrines of the Catholic Church, then you are Catholic in name only. Ask your priest–he would probably tell you the same. (especially if you tell him that you feel some doctrines are unscriptural).

 

[E.E.N.S]

John Mazar:

exoflare, Gilbert Keith and anybody else who doubts that I am a Catholic,

I hate to break it to you guys but I am a Catholic because I was Baptized as an infant in the Catholic Church and I am a practicing Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend and I am on the membership roll of the local Catholic Church.

I do not have to believe all Catholic doctrines especially the unscriptural doctrines in order to be a good Catholic. I consider myself to be a good Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend.

You are right, you are a Catholic since you were baptized, but since you openly denounce the Catholic teachings (Dogmas even) that makes you a dissenting Catholic (or in the old days you would be called a heretic.)

May God open your eyes.

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

*I am a practicing Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend and I am on the membership roll of the local Catholic Church.
*

This is not the definition of a Catholic. A Catholic is someone who pledges allegiance to all Catholic doctrines … not the ones of his choice.

Unfortunately, all too many so-called Catholics adopt this cafeteria style. It was promoted or at least tolerated by liberal clergy starting in the sixties. When Catholics saw their clergy departing from the faith, they thought they too could do so with impunity. After all, weren’t these clergy still wearing their collars?

Richard McBrien comes to mind as a classic example of clergy that left the Church long ago but their Order or their Bishops were too weak and vacillating to confront them.

 

[exoflare]

John Mazar:

exoflare, Gilbert Keith and anybody else who doubts that I am a Catholic,

I hate to break it to you guys but I am a Catholic because I was Baptized as an infant in the Catholic Church and I am a practicing Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend and I am on the membership roll of the local Catholic Church.

I do not have to believe all Catholic doctrines especially the unscriptural doctrines in order to be a good Catholic. I consider myself to be a good Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend.

You’re about as “Catholic” as Martin Luther, or for a more recent example, John Kerry.

 

[mark_a]

John Mazar:

exoflare, Gilbert Keith and anybody else who doubts that I am a Catholic,

I hate to break it to you guys but I am a Catholic because I was Baptized as an infant in the Catholic Church and I am a practicing Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend and I am on the membership roll of the local Catholic Church.

I do not have to believe all Catholic doctrines especially the unscriptural doctrines in order to be a good Catholic. I consider myself to be a good Catholic because I attend Mass every weekend.

Maybe you should discuss this with your priest, I hope you are not taking communion.