What is wrong with Unitarian Universalism?

[PRmerger]

PR, as your faith teaches, does that mark make Cheese Catholic, “Catholic”, or UU?

It makes him a child of God and my brother in Christ. When he left the Catholic Church he became, naturally, an “ex-Catholic”. Now that he joined the UU, and has UU as part of his profile, that makes him a UU.

Or PR someone might come to the non Catholic religion forum to discuss and answer questions about UU so we all can be better informed. Though I’ve tried to explore various faiths in my lifetime since there are many faiths besides the Catholic faith, I actually welcome the opportunity here to still learn more about others too.

No argument with you here.

 

[PRmerger]

I always did find these words curious. PR, what if a UU or “Catholic” (note OMs for your pleasure) felt healed and called to receive after reciting this prayer just before Commuion?

It’s the same as if a couple, feeling that they’re married but actually aren’t, wants to enjoy the marital embrace.

They aren’t married so they ought not enjoy the marital embrace.

So, if a UU (esp an ex-Catholic who has divorced himself from the Church) wants to enjoy our One Flesh Union I would tell him: get married to Her first! Make it legal! Do it right!

The beautiful words from Scripture (Matt 8:8) that we recite at Mass are a sinful spouse’s attempt to make amends.

Like when you tell you wife, “Honey, I am not worthy to have you as my wife, but only say the word and I will be forgiven!”

It doesn’t work if you’ve divorced yourself from her. You cannot divorce yourself, saying, “I don’t love you!” and then come home and want to be One with Her.

 

[PRmerger]

My wife and I did not use artificial birth control, and when we had fertility issues,** we used the Pius XXII institute to help concieve.**

Now you’ve got me wondering how “uber-Catholic” you actually were, cheese.

I don’t think you went to the “Pius XII institute” to help you conceive.

Unless you went to a high school to do it.

Now, it’s possible that you actually went to the Pope Paul VI institute, but now the doubt is there.

 

[CMatt25]

It makes him a child of God and my brother in Christ. When he left the Catholic Church he became, naturally, an “ex-Catholic”. Now that he joined the UU, and has UU as part of his profile, that makes him a UU.

PR, understand I am not saying Cheese or any Catholic who joins UU necessarily considers themselves Catholic. I asked what your faith teaches. But now I am uncertain if you are in agreement with responses to my thread on the Apologetics forum about Catholics joining other communities, responses such as “he always remains part of the Body of Christ, the Catholic Church” and “**they remain a Catholic **in fact and in law”.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=597641

Or in agreement with Catholic Answers apologist Michelle Arnold when she says, “A person who is **baptized a Catholic **(and thus born again) is made a member of Christ’s body, the Church. Baptism imparts a supernatural character upon his soul **that can never be lost even if the person apostasizes from the faith **… it is indeed possible but unfortunate that there are people who can be called non-practicing Catholics”.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=18277&postcount=2

I see where a baptized Catholic is made a member of Christ’s body, the Catholic Church. Where they remain a member or might be a non-practicing Catholic. But I don’t see “ex”.

So I only know It can be confusing to me. In any case, God bless you on your journey and peace.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Apologies, you are correct, it was the Paul the 6th institute. And you are also correct, we didn’t go there, we used a local doctor who is affiliated with the organization.

If it all it takes to introduce doubt to you is one mistype, maybe UU is right for you after all.

 

[CMatt25]

It’s the same as if a couple, feeling that they’re married but actually aren’t.

Like when you tell you wife, “Honey, I am not worthy to have you as my wife, but only say the word and I will be forgiven!”

It doesn’t work if you’ve divorced yourself from her. You cannot divorce yourself, saying, “I don’t love you!” and then come home and want to be One with Her.

Hmm. I’m not sure I can equate an unwed couple feeling they are legally married when they are not, with after reciting a prayer, hearing the word and being healed. But thank you for your example.

I don’t have a wife… oh oops. SORRY PR! I nearly forgot your examples are not to be taken too literally. :doh2:

 

[PRmerger]

PR, understand I am not saying Cheese or any Catholic who joins UU necessarily considers themselves Catholic. I asked what your faith teaches.

My faith teaches that they are theologically part of the Church. But it doesn’t say that I have to call them Catholic. I call them my separated brethren in Christ, ex-Catholic, UU, atheist, Wiccan, or whatever religious affiliation they have embraced.

Just like in the sacrament of marriage. Even though the Church teaches that once the sacrament is confected, only death separates the couple…and they are theologically always married, if they are divorced I call them “divorced”.

But now I am **uncertain **if you are in agreement with responses to my thread on the Apologetics forum about Catholics joining other communities, responses such as “he always remains part of the Body of Christ, the Catholic Church” and “**they remain a Catholic **in fact and in law”.

Well, then, you ought to embrace this, eh? I think you and cheese both like to think of uncertainty as a positive rather than negative, so…do you like being uncertain regarding this?

I see where a baptized Catholic is made a member of Christ’s body, the Catholic Church. Where they remain a member or might be a non-practicing Catholic. But I don’t see “ex”.

I refer to my ex-brother-in-law as my “ex-BIL” even though he is indelibly united to my SIL through marriage. They are divorced, so even though theologically they are ONE still (until the annulment comes through, if it does) so I call them what they are superficially: an ex-

So I only know It can be confusing to me.

Is this good in your eyes, to be confused?

 

[PRmerger]

Apologies, you are correct, it was the Paul the 6th institute. And you are also correct, we didn’t go there, we used a local doctor who is affiliated with the organization.

If it all it takes to introduce doubt to you is one mistype, maybe UU is right for you after all.

Yes, now I am uncertain about your truthfulness in all aspects. :sad_yes:

To me, this is a bad thing.

But as you have said that you “embrace uncertainty” I presume that you are not offended that I think you may be lying in your posts, esp. with regard to your Catholicity?

Again, I don’t like this uncertainty that now exists when I read your posts.

You think this is good, then, right? Uncertainty is a good in your paradigm.

 

[PRmerger]

Hmm. I’m not sure I can equate an unwed couple feeling they are legally married when they are not, with after reciting a prayer, hearing the word and being healed.

No, Matt. I am not comparing an unwed couple feeling they are legally married with reciting a prayer.

I am comparing an unmarried couple with a non-Catholic wanting to receive the Eucharist, even if he feels united to Christ and His Body. The couple feels they are married, but the reality is: they are NOT. This non-Catholic feels he is in communion with the Church, but the reality is: he is NOT.

And just as the unmarried couple would be fornicating if they engage in sexual relations, the One Flesh Union, so, too, would this non-Catholic be fornicating if he received the Eucharist, the One Flesh Union with Christ.

 

[CMatt25]

My faith teaches that they are theologically part of the Church. But it doesn’t say that I have to call them Catholic. I call them my separated brethren in Christ, ex-Catholic, UU, atheist, Wiccan, or whatever religious affiliation they have embraced.

Just like in the sacrament of marriage. Even though the Church teaches that once the sacrament is confected, only death separates the couple…and they are theologically always married, if they are divorced I call them “divorced”.

Well, then, you ought to embrace this, eh? I think you and cheese both like to think of uncertainty as a positive rather than negative, so…do you like being uncertain regarding this?

I refer to my ex-brother-in-law as my “ex-BIL” even though he is indelibly united to my SIL through marriage. They are divorced, so even though theologically they are ONE still (until the annulment comes through, if it does) so I call them what they are superficially: an ex-

Is this good in your eyes, to be confused?

PR, you perhaps might be confusing on the one hand the reality of there existing a degree of uncertainty with regard to what the human finite mind can, in faith, truly know with 100% absolute certainty in regard to the one ultmate truth… with being uncertain of what the Catholic faith teaches.

But now I am more confused on the latter when I see even according to you there are folks who are part of the Catholic Church but who Catholics don’t have to call Catholic. Instead they can call them “Catholic” or ex for instance. And then there are theologically married Catholics who are called divorced even though the Church does not endorse divorce of the secular realm.

But oh well I guess I shall remain confused. No sense in my head continuing to spin :hypno: more than it has to. Peace.

 

[CMatt25]

No, Matt. I am not comparing an unwed couple feeling they are legally married with reciting a prayer.

I am comparing an unmarried couple with a non-Catholic wanting to receive the Eucharist, even if he feels united to Christ and His Body. The couple feels they are married, but the reality is: they are NOT. This non-Catholic feels he is in communion with the Church, but the reality is: he is NOT.

And just as the unmarried couple would be fornicating if they engage in sexual relations, the One Flesh Union, so, too, would this non-Catholic be fornicating if he received the Eucharist, the One Flesh Union with Christ.

Thanks PR for trying. I truly appreciate your efforts and examples. And I do understand what you are saying. But I’m also uncertain how you know during this prayer that the unworthy person did not hear His word and was healed. I guess it comes down to faith. God bless all Catholics, the UUs of this thread, and all along our journeys.

 

[PRmerger]

In any case, God bless you on your journey and peace.

Just so you know, I don’t respond with similar epitaphs for this reason: I hate it when my honey’s family ends their phone calls with “Love you!” It just makes me roll my eyes. My family doesn’t do that.

I like to say, “I love you!” when the spirit moves me. Not when I’ve made a phone call asking if they’re coming over at 3 or at 4.

I know, it’s my problem. I just don’t like to do it in real life. And I don’t like to do it in virtual life either.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Yes, now I am uncertain about your truthfulness in all aspects. :sad_yes:

Sure, I’ve spent the last six years posting and with only 1300 posts pretending to be a former seminarian. I do it for the lulz.

 

[PRmerger]

Sure, I’ve spent the last six years posting and with only 1300 posts pretending to be a former seminarian. I do it for the lulz.

Sarcasm is the protest of the weak, cheese.

I rarely use it.

At any rate, you can’t fault me for being uncertain now, eh? Firstly, you like uncertainty. And secondly, you have given me reason to be uncertain.

And what’s “lulz”?

 

[PRmerger]

But I’m also uncertain how you know during this prayer that the unworthy person did not hear His word and was healed.

Oh, please don’t misunderstand, friend. I never said that I believe this person (are you talking about a baptized Catholic here?) did not hear His word and was healed.

If he is Catholic and has no mortal sin on his soul then he can certainly receive communion.

If he is not Catholic then he needs do it right, make it legal, and “marry” the Church by joining the Church if he wants to enjoy the One Flesh Union.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Sarcasm is the protest of the weak, cheese.

Just pointing out absurdity when I see it.

 

[PRmerger]

Just pointing out absurdity when I see it.

You are using “absurdity” interchangeably with “uncertainty”. I said I now had uncertainty. You find uncertainty absurd now.

This is odd, given the fact that you claim to have “embraced uncertainty.”

It seems that what you are coming to realize now, friend, is that uncertainty truly is absurdity!

 

[cheese_sdc]

Now you are being delibratily obtuse and I find that rude. Have a good life, brah. I’m out.

 

[CMatt25]

Just so you know, I don’t respond with similar epitaphs for this reason: I hate it when my honey’s family ends their phone calls with “Love you!” It just makes me roll my eyes. My family doesn’t do that.

I like to say, “I love you!” when the spirit moves me. Not when I’ve made a phone call asking if they’re coming over at 3 or at 4.

I know, it’s my problem. I just don’t like to do it in real life. And I don’t like to do it in virtual life either.

Not a problem my friend. I sure hope the spirit is moving within me too!

 

[PRmerger]

Now you are being delibratily obtuse and I find that rude. Have a good life, brah. I’m out.

As you wish, friend.

I will simply say that it was you who said you embraced uncertainty. And now you’re calling uncertainty an absurdity.

Indeed it is.

That was my point all along and why the UU’s Elevation of Uncertainty was, well, absurd.