What does it mean to be a "Faithful" Catholic?

[itsjustdave1988]

dennisknapp:

Thanks, so what is our state if we do not agree with these canons?

Peace

One doesn’t have to agree with them. One is obliged, however, to obey them. If they do not obey the law, but at the same time they claim Catholic citizenship and partaking of the benefits of citizenship, I’d say they are criminal. Wouln’t you?

There’s a group of folks in Montana where I used to live that claim to be good US citizens and partake of the benefits of US citizenship, yet they defiantly refuse to pay taxes. Are they good US citizens or criminals?

 

[Roman_Army]

Being a faithful Catholic means to agree 100% of everything that the Church requires us to believe and do. So in other words, you can disbelieve the aparitions of Our Lady of Fatima and all other apparitions. They are not required to be believed. You can choose wether or not to believe in Limbo. You can reject saying the Rosary. Either way you’re still a faithful Catholic. Also, you can agree 100% with the Church but if you don’t have faith you’re not a faithful Catholic. You have to believe, express, love, and follow those beliefs. So, there are things that are not required to be believed and things that are not required to be done. Also, you can disagree with the Pope on certain social issues, like the war in Iraq and so on. But, obviously you can’t disagree with the Pope on abortion being wrong and etc.

So, one of the major requirments of the Church is learning more about it. So, in doing so you will find out what is only optional. But, just because the Church says that you should confess and go to mass at least once a year doesn’t mean you should do that, lol. I think that’s only in grave matters. We are obligated to attend mass on the certain required Holy Days and all Sundays. Also, if you are conscious of grave sin you can’t recieve communion. You must confess those sins first.

 

[Jennifer123]

petra:

I believe it is because the Church is making some errors in pastoral practice. As long as the Church continues to procure obedience to disciplines through threats of mortal sin – disciplines that only apply to Catholics, and therefore are not violations that are inherently and eternally sinful–the body of believers will remain estranged.

Hi Petra-
I understand what you are getting at but I have to disagree with you here. :twocents: It’s not the Church that threatens obedience with mortal sin, it’s God. There is sin that leads to spiritual death, and it is the denial of sin, whether venial or mortal. You can’t lump all sin together because not all sin leads to death - a 12 year old child violating a parent’s rule over phone usage is not the equivalent to a murder committed by an adult.

My point isn’t about the nature of sin, but that it’s the Church’s commission, as Jesus tells us, to lead us into truth. The Church teaches about mortal and venial sin because it is a real doctrine, rooted in scripture. Mortal sin could lead us into hell, whether that’s fashionable or not. The Church is concerned about our souls and only the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth, making only it able to tell us what is a mortal or venial sin. These aren’t arbitrary “rules” meant to trip anyone up or enslave them to an “unbiblical” doctrine - these are violations against God’s commandments.

To me I guess the point comes down to this, either you believe the Catholic Church has this ability or you don’t.

 

[petra]

Jennifer123:

Hi Petra-
I understand what you are getting at but I have to disagree with you here. :twocents: It’s not the Church that threatens obedience with mortal sin, it’s God. There is sin that leads to spiritual death, and it is the denial of sin, whether venial or mortal. You can’t lump all sin together because not all sin leads to death - a 12 year old child violating a parent’s rule over phone usage is not the equivalent to a murder committed by an adult.

My point isn’t about the nature of sin, but that it’s the Church’s commission, as Jesus tells us, to lead us into truth. The Church teaches about mortal and venial sin because it is a real doctrine, rooted in scripture. Mortal sin could lead us into Hell, whether that’s fashionable or not. The Church is concerned about our souls and only the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth, making only it able to tell us what is a mortal or venial sin. These aren’t arbitrary “rules” meant to trip anyone up or enslave them to an “unbiblical” doctrine - these are violations against God’s commandments.

To me I guess the point comes down to this, either you believe the Catholic Church has this ability or you don’t.

Hi Jennifer,

I definitely agree with the distinction between venial and mortal sins. It is, indeed, scriptural. Sacred scripture also provides us with a concept of what those types of sins are. They are sins that would be seriously sinful for anyone – Catholic, Protestant, or non-Christian.

I believe the Church has the authority to rightly discern what is inherently sinful (regardless of who commits the sin). The Church also has the right to create whatever rules she wants to provide guidance to the faithful in their spiritual life. But the Church does not have the right to invent new sins or to elevate venial sins to the mortal level for certain people and not others. This was not the intent of Christ when He gave the Church the authority to bind and loose. God determines what is sinful and to what degree (also taking into account the three necessary components of mortal sin). The Church simply discerns what God has already declared. And if a certain thing is a grave matter for one person and not another, that should be a clue that it is not a declaration of God, but of the Church. God shows no partiality.

Where the Catholic Church goes wrong in this is in her obsession to maintain unity through force and threats of damnation. I am speaking specifically about violations of canon law----not moral law. It is good for Catholics to abide by canon law. We should submit to authority. But the Church is not giving the Holy Spirit enough credit for His ability to discipline believers. If we are a Christian, the scriptures promise we will be disciplined! It is one of the proofs that we are His! From what I can see, the Orthodox have a much greater appreciation for the sovereignty and work of the Holy Spirit in a Christian’s life.

 

[Jennifer123]

petra:

But the Church does not have the right to invent new sins or to elevate venial sins to the mortal level for certain people and not others. This was not the intent of Christ when He gave the Church the authority to bind and loose. God determines what is sinful and to what degree (also taking into account the three necessary components of mortal sin). The Church simply discerns what God has already declared. And if a certain thing is a grave matter for one person and not another, that should be a clue that it is not a declaration of God, but of the Church. God shows no partiality.

Where the Catholic Church goes wrong in this is in her obsession to maintain unity through force and threats of damnation. I am speaking specifically about violations of canon law----not moral law. It is good for Catholics to abide by canon law. We should submit to authority.

Hi-
Good post - thanks for clarifying. I guess I’m just curious as to what specific disciplines you are talking about? Maybe we could start another thread on the topic. Sounds like you have a lot of good points that we should discuss.

 

[petra]

Jennifer123:

Hi-
Good post - thanks for clarifying. I guess I’m just curious as to what specific disciplines you are talking about? Maybe we could start another thread on the topic. Sounds like you have a lot of good points that we should discuss.

Hi Jennifer,

Sure, here are a few examples of mortal sins that only apply to Catholics and not other Christians:

• Failing to fulfill Sunday obligation without an approved reason
• Failing to observe required fasts
• Getting married outside the Catholic Church

I certainly do not disagree that we should attend Mass, we should participate in required fasts, and we should want to get married in the Church that has the fulness of the Gospel. And I agree that each of these violations are sins. But if they are really mortal sins, rather than venial, then salvation outside the Catholic Church would not be possible. Protestants do not attend mass and they do not participate in our fasts. But the Church clearly teaches salvation IS possible outside the Church. And the Church recognizes Protestant marriages as both valid and sacramental.

The above are mortal sins simply because the Church has determined them to be so. I’ve discussed this quite a bit with other folks in this forum. They have told me that the basis of the Church’s ability to create binding rules under pain of mortal sin for Catholics is Christ’s transferance of authority to Peter to bind and loose. The Church therefore has the perogotive to invent sins or elevate venial sins to the mortal level–and people will apparently go to hell for violating those new rules.

I’ve been told by others that Mother Church only does this for our own good. I liken this to a mother saying to her child, “Eating your vegatables, taking your vitamins, and getting 8 hours of sleep is very good for you. It is so good for you that I am going to set up some consequences if you don’t do these things. If you refuse to do these healthy things for yourself, I will kill you. Now if you repent and then do the thing you at first refused to do, then you are forgiven. But if you do not repent, I will kill you.” This is exactly how the Church’s approach strikes me. Jesus NEVER gave the Church this kind of authority.

Again, if something is not sinful for one Christian, how can it be sinful for another? The only thing I can anticipate someone saying is that it is not really a sin of missing mass, not fasting, etc. It is a sin against the authority of the Church. This goes back to my impression that this is ultimately about the Church being obsessed with controlling people to procure unity. I say the Church is really missing something significant here–and that is the work of the Holy Spirit in a person’s life. Does not the Church have faith that the Holy Spirit will discipline a believer that is straying? Doesn’t the Church realize that love is a greater motivator than threats?

 

[NotWorthy]

petra:

Hi Jennifer,

Sure, here are a few examples of mortal sins that only apply to Catholics and not other Christians:

• Failing to fulfill Sunday obligation without an approved reason
• Failing to observe required fasts
• Getting married outside the Catholic Church

Failing to observe a fast is a mortal sin? I wasn’t aware of that. I thought fasting and abstinence were disciplines that are encouraged, but not under penalty of mortal sin.

Getting married outside of the Church? Marriage is a Holy Covenant between the husband, the spouse, and God! It is not something to be treated like a sideshow. If not treated with the utmost respect, it denegrates into the spectacles that it often does now.

Skipping Mass without a good reason? There should be NO REASON to skip a Mass without a good reason. I consider it a little thing called, priorities. BTW, I absolutely detest the phrase “Sunday Obligation”, because it implies that we are going to Mass because we have to, instead of going because we “earnestly desire to share the Eucharistic Meal” with Christ!

Thanks!

I remain NotWorthy

 

[petra]

NotWorthy:

Failing to observe a fast is a mortal sin? I wasn’t aware of that. I thought fasting and abstinence were disciplines that are encouraged, but not under penalty of mortal sin.

I thought there were instances in which Catholics were required to abstain (like meat on Lenten Fridays). I thought not doing so was a mortal sin. If I’m mistaken, please correct me.

Getting married outside of the Church? Marriage is a Holy Covenant between the husband, the spouse, and God! It is not something to be treated like a sideshow. If not treated with the utmost respect, it denegrates into the spectacles that it often does now.

I completely agree. But whether the wedding is reverent or not, the Church recognizes Protestant marriages as valid and sacramental. My point here is what the Church regards as licit (and sacramental, no less) for one person is mortally sinful for another.

Skipping Mass without a good reason? There should be NO REASON to skip a Mass without a good reason. I consider it a little thing called, priorities. BTW, I absolutely detest the phrase “Sunday Obligation”, because it implies that we are going to Mass because we have to, instead of going because we “earnestly desire to share the Eucharistic Meal” with Christ!

Again, no disagreement. But you’re missing my point. I’m not saying that not doing these things is not sin. I’m saying that the Church has determined that it is mortal sin for some and not others. Does the Church have the authority to tell God what offenses are going to damnable, and then He has to obey and dutifully send someone to hell for a sin the Church created? I thought it was the other way around. I thought God was in charge.

Sorry to use the term Sunday Obligation. I used it since the Church uses that term, and I was trying to be precise in what I meant. The term actually offends me, too, and for the same reason that it offends me that the Church uses threats to get her people in line. I love going to Mass and can hardly wait until tomorrow morning. But it is so depressing to know that the Church has an axe looming over my head. It has the effect of stealing my joy. Suddenly it doesn’t matter that I want to be there. I have to be there----or else.

 

[NotWorthy]

petra:

I completely agree. But whether the wedding is reverent or not, the Church recognizes Protestant marriages as valid and sacramental. My point here is what the Church regards as licit (and sacramental, no less) for one person is mortally sinful for another.

OK, I understand your point. But let’s look at it this way. The Magesterium for the Catholic Church can only tell Catholics what is sinful and what is not. What kind of a can of worms would we be opening if we tell Baptists that, unless they have a Catholic Wedding, it’s “null and void, Bay-Bee”?

So do we look at the Ten Commandments as God being a slave-driver, or do we look at it as what God intends for us to do in order to maintain our relationship with Him? The Catholic Church teaches many things on faith and morals. The fasting is a discipline, which is intended to bring us closer to God, through our sufferings. This year I completely fasted each Friday during Lent, and enjoyed the experience, although the colors in front of my eyes got pretty vivid Friday evenings!

Back to what I was saying, I’d rather have a parent that taught me right from wrong, then a parent that doesn’t want to upset me by telling me I’m doing wrong. Just look at how other religions have relaxed their restrictions on birth control, divorce (OK, given the relative ease of annulments, maybe this is a bad example), and homosexuality. This kind of mentality sort of reminds me of the parenting techniques that have evolved (or should I say devolved) lately that are meant to shield our kids from any kind of emotional trauma (and thus they don’t grow emotionally).

Wow, I didn’t know I was rambling so much. I hope somewhere in the post was some kind of a point you can take with you.

Maybe that why I’m NotWorthy.

John

 

[Annunciata]

dennisknapp:

What does it mean to be a “Faithful” Catholic?

Is it agreeing with 80% of what the Church teaches? 90%? 99%?

When the Church calls us the Faithful, what does she mean? What does she expect?

Peace

Loyalty to the Holy Father and the Magisterium…Keeping all the Commandments and Precepts of the Church… Performing Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy…oh, and agreeing 100% w/ Her teachings.:yup:

 

[petra]

NotWorthy:

OK, I understand your point. But let’s look at it this way. The Magesterium for the Catholic Church can only tell Catholics what is sinful and what is not. What kind of a can of worms would we be opening if we tell Baptists that, unless they have a Catholic Wedding, it’s “null and void, Bay-Bee”?

So it’s gravely sinful for Baptists to get married in a Baptist Church and they are really subsequently committing fornication, but because of the “can of worms” that would result from the Church’s declaration that the marriage is invalid, the Church lets it slide?

So do we look at the Ten Commandments as God being a slave-driver, or do we look at it as what God intends for us to do in order to maintain our relationship with Him? The Catholic Church teaches many things on faith and morals. The fasting is a discipline, which is intended to bring us closer to God, through our sufferings.

Agreed, but please see my previous analogy of the mother’s imposed consequence resulting from the child not doing what is good for him.

Back to what I was saying, I’d rather have a parent that taught me right from wrong, then a parent that doesn’t want to upset me by telling me I’m doing wrong. Just look at how other religions have relaxed their restrictions on birth control, divorce (OK, given the relative ease of annulments, maybe this is a bad example), and homosexuality.

Apples and oranges here. I’m not talking about things that are morally or inherently sinful. Things such as contraception, abortion, remarriage if previous marriage was valid, stealing, etc. are gravely sinful for everyone. They are sinful because they violate eternal spiritual law. I am only speaking of Canon Law violations–laws that only apply to Catholics.

I probably should have taken Jennifer’s advice and started a new thread. I’m sorry for the highjack, Dennis.

 

[NotWorthy]

petra:

So it’s gravely sinful for Baptists to get married in a Baptist Church and they are really subsequently committing fornication, but because of the “can of worms” that would result from the Church’s declaration that the marriage is invalid, the Church lets it slide?

No, it’s just that (in my opinion) we can not fault a separated brethren for following the pre-cepts (or lack thereof) of their church.

Don’t forget, a lot of the “peculiararities” of the Catholic teachings, i.e. Real Presence in the Eucharist, Forgiveness of Sins in Confession, Anointing of the Sick, “Sunday Obligation” (insert your own gag reflex at the use of this term) are means of instilling grace in those who are reaching out to Christ (similar to the woman who was hemorhaging and touched Christ. Even though He was surrounded by people, only she received healing and forgiveness because of her faith.). So when Catholics receive the Sacrament of Marriage, they are infused with Christ’s Loving Grace. Our friends across the Tiber do not receive this Grace, if for no other reason, they don’t believe they are supposed to receive any.

Thanks for your patience with following my rants and ravings.

NotWorthy

P.S. When oh when are we going to get spell checker in these forums. I don’t know if I can mis-spell hemorhage any worse.

 

[Jennifer123]

NotWorthy:

So when Catholics receive the Sacrament of Marriage, they are infused with Christ’s Loving Grace. Our friends across the Tiber do not receive this Grace, if for no other reason, they don’t believe they are supposed to receive any.

.

Hi-

I think this may be getting to the heart of Petra’s queries? Much is required of those who have much, and we Catholics have the fullness of truth, so much is required of us. Is this the essential difference?

 

[NotWorthy]

Jennifer,
You may be right. One of the problems I have with the original question(s) of Petra’s was that “this is a mortal sin”, or “that is a mortal sin”. It goes along with the various “The CC says you’re going to hell if…” statements I’ve read today.

The CC doesn’t say "you’re going to hell if… " nearly as often as people think it does. Instead it says, “you are putting your soul at risk if…”. So what is it doing by “talking down” to us like this? Why…maybe it’s teachings us faith and morals!!! Sort of like it’s supposed to! Maybe I’m misreading the tone of other postings, but that was the intent when I indicated how other faiths are watering down their guidelines on being a good Christian (I hope I’m not mixing up threads here, I’ve been on several, tonight).

Thanks for your gentle nudge, there.

John

 

[ames61]

petra:

I think “Faithful Catholic” is synonymous with “Faithful Christian”. If the Catholic Church is really the fulness of Christian faith (and I believe it is) there should be no distinction between the terms. Being a faithful Christian is the pursuit of knowing God better, becoming more holy and Spirit-filled, and taking the message of Christ to those that do not know Him.

I would say that Faithful Catholic is a subset of Faithful Christian. That is all Faithful Catholics are Faithful Christians, in that they are seeking to know and to love and to serve the Lord with all their heart and all their mind, but also that they are doing so in union with the Catholic Church. To be in union with the Church would be to believe and profess all that the Catholic Church teaches, believes and proclaims to be true. (as I was privileged to declare when coming into the Church at Easter Vigil 2001)

 

[AlanFromWichita]

A “faithful” Catholic would be one with at least a mustard seed of faith, I would presume.

According to Christ, that person should be able to say unto a mountain “go cast yourself into the sea” without any doubt, and it would do it.

If someone shows me that sort of faith, then I will bow to his presence. Until then I suppose we’re all about in the same boat, just in slightly different positions.

Alan