What makes a Catholic?

[TheApologist]

What makes a Catholic? To be Catholic he has to be baptized in the Trinitarian formula, and confirmed in the faith. He is a member of the Catholic Church.

A true Catholic ought to believe all doctrines and teachings of the Church concerning faith and moral.

They are not required to understand it fully and must rely on faith that these teachings come from Jesus Christ.

I must confess I do not understand all the teachings of the Catholic Church but I put my faith in the Church, which Jesus Christ built upon Peter, and this Church exist today and Pope Benedict XVI is the successor of Peter.

There are a few practicing Catholics around and many are gather here in the forum. The majority of Catholics strongly disagree with the Catholic Church teachings because they do not understand of it. They don’t know that teachings which the Church teaches is from Jesus.

Jesus speaks through his Church when teaching moral and faith issue.This is invoke in the Gospels.

“He who hears you, hears me.”

“Whatever you bind on earth will be bind in heaven, whatever you loose on earth, will be loose in heaven.”

I can go on and on. Fr. Corapi’s lecture connects the Catechism of the Catholic Church to the authority of Jesus Christ. Fr. Corapi states, "it is not the teaching of Fr. Corapi, bishop william wigen, or Pope John Paul II. It is about the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I have listened to his MP3 and it he is pretty clear what the truth is. I know my faith has been strong and Fr. Corapi’s lecture only strengthen my faith. I not sure if all Catholics will be convince if they listen these lecture will be convincing.

It would be up to the Holy Spirit to change their hearts. There is a reason why we have to be obedient to the Church.

I’ll just mention a few. In the Church, we received the Holy Spirit in baptism and confirmation, we received Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, we receive absolution of sins through the Sacrament of Reconciliation, Annointing the Sick.

If we tell Catholics that Jesus is TRULY presence they will go to Church. Unfortunately, I read somewhere that only 64% of Catholic do not believe in Real Presence amongst Catholics.

I don’t know the latest stats. I think there a great need to Re-Catechize Catholics. I so desire those lost sheep of the Catholic Church to come home. Jesus misses them in Holy Communion.

Good post.
Ummm…isn’t the sacrament of Reconciliation in Annoiting of the Sick? I don’t know.

Anyway, I really think there is a need for Real Presence-catechesis. In Catholic school we were either given an explanation by a confused teacher or simply not told. In Confirmation preparation they simply told us that “the Real Presence of Jesus is in the Eucharist.” I only truly learned the complete Real Presence from Catholic.com and the Catechism. I think I might go tell those Catholic educators to get it straight and start teaching it straight.

Umm your stat on how many Catholics believe in the Real Presence is a little flawed…they explain it in This Rock…
catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9910qq.asp

 

[thomasf]

No. It matters to me because I live to seek the truth.

I am sorry if asking these questions about what you may take for granted rubs against your sensibilities.

It doesn’t rub against my sensibilities. It doesn’t affect my faith either way what the numbers of catholics or protestants or whatever are. Why does it affect you? I don’t think it really matters. If you manage to find the truth, according to Atemi, will it vindicate or verify or prove your faith? Do you seek the truth, or do you seek to be right? If you manage to win every debate and argument on here, will it make you feel better about your faith?

 

[lak611]

Good post.
Ummm…isn’t the sacrament of Reconciliation in Annoiting of the Sick? I don’t know.

Normally, if a person is conscious and able to understand and speak, he will receive the sacrament of penance first, then annointing of the sick and Holy Communion. If a person is unconscious and cannot confess, annointing of the sick will forgive his sins.

 

[Larry1700]

Just FYI, in case you didn’t already know, but be sure to read the profiles on the people who are replying to your questions.

 

[La-Petite-Fleur]

IMHO, there are two kinds of lay or Religious Catholics: loyal and apostate.

What makes a good Catholic is loyalty to the Church, for Jesus.

Deviation from this in any form whatsoever, even in the slightest, is something that does not make a Catholic person Catholic. This includes cafeteria catholicism (picking and choosing), and so-called ‘progressive’ ‘catholicism’, which is not rooted in Christ, but moral relativism (i.e.- the self).

 

[eliasaph99]

Ahhh.

Not accurate research there.

How do you suppose they determine who is in that number?

Gottle of Geer provided you with a citation. If you want to know how the statistic was compiled, go to the reference cited and do your own legwork.

 

[eliasaph99]

No. It matters to me because I live to seek the truth.

I am sorry if asking these questions about what you may take for granted rubs against your sensibilities.

You’re not seeking the truth. Just doubting what others have written.

That doesn’t quite live up to the effort required to call oneself a seeker.

You see, to seek, one has to actually look.

If you want to refute or doubt someones cited statistic, then come up with your own reputable source and provide it as a counter.

Otherwise, your argument amounts to little more than the foot-stamping of a toddler.

 

[Atemi]

Gottle of Geer provided you with a citation. If you want to know how the statistic was compiled, go to the reference cited and do your own legwork.

I wasn’t aware asking “how do you suppose” was too complicated.

I apologize.

 

[Atemi]

You’re not seeking the truth. Just doubting what others have written.

That doesn’t quite live up to the effort required to call oneself a seeker.

You see, to seek, one has to actually look.

If you want to refute or doubt someones cited statistic, then come up with your own reputable source and provide it as a counter.

Otherwise, your argument amounts to little more than the foot-stamping of a toddler.

Just because you swallow every Catholic post or statistic as if it fell right out of Heaven, there are those of us who do not do so.

Some of us like to flesh the reality out a bit. Sorry if questioning what you accept without question is an offense to you.

 

[eliasaph99]

Just because you swallow every Catholic post or statistic as if it fell right out of Heaven, there are those of us who do not do so.

Some of us like to flesh the reality out a bit. Sorry if questioning what you accept without question is an offense to you.

It’s not the questioning of the statistic that bothers me. Its the childishness of simply shaking ones head and going ‘nuh-uh’ without a single statement as to why you are contradicting the person or why you are doubting the statement.

At the least, you could provide a logical counter argument, but you haven’t.

All you’ve done is said, “Nope, don’t believe it.”

Exactly how is that “fleshing out reality”?

So, like I said before, you could verify Gottle of Geers statistic. I did. It took me about 15 seconds on Google.

Then, if you so like, you could research how the statistic was compiled and enlighten all of us as to why you think that the reporting body’s methodology is flawed.

Otherwise, your contribution to the discussion is that of an annoying, ill mannered child.

 

[thomasf]

Just because you swallow every Catholic post or statistic as if it fell right out of Heaven, there are those of us who do not do so.

Some of us like to flesh the reality out a bit. Sorry if questioning what you accept without question is an offense to you.

You ARE on a catholic board, afterall. No matter how much you stomp your feet and throw fits about meaningless stuff, it’s not going to make the catholic church wrtong, the catholic faithful disappear, or your side right.

It’s not the questioning of the statistic that bothers me. Its the childishness of simply shaking ones head and going ‘nuh-uh’ without a single statement as to why you are contradicting the person or why you are doubting the statement.

At the least, you could provide a logical counter argument, but you haven’t.

All you’ve done is said, “Nope, don’t believe it.”

Exactly how is that “fleshing out reality”?

So, like I said before, you could verify Gottle of Geers statistic. I did. It took me about 15 seconds on Google.

Then, if you so like, you could research how the statistic was compiled and enlighten all of us as to why you think that the reporting body’s methodology is flawed.

Otherwise, your contribution to the discussion is that of an annoying, ill mannered child.

You said it a lot nicer than I would have. Thanks.

 

[Atemi]

It’s not the questioning of the statistic that bothers me. Its the childishness of simply shaking ones head and going ‘nuh-uh’ without a single statement as to why you are contradicting the person or why you are doubting the statement.

At the least, you could provide a logical counter argument, but you haven’t.

There was no argument made. Thus no counter argument.

All you’ve done is said, “Nope, don’t believe it.”

I said it was bad research.

Still remains so, IMO.

Exactly how is that “fleshing out reality”?

So, like I said before, you could verify Gottle of Geers statistic. I did. It took me about 15 seconds on Google.

Then, if you so like, you could research how the statistic was compiled and enlighten all of us as to why you think that the reporting body’s methodology is flawed.

I already know how the statistic is determined. That was never in question.

What I proceeded to ask Gottle is how did HE suppose who they included in such a number.

Otherwise, your contribution to the discussion is that of an annoying, ill mannered child.

You really hate people questioning data that everyone is just supposed to blindly nod their head at, don’t you?

It is interesting that questioning one number could produce such a backlash. Are the conclusions of the Statistical Yearbook of the Church sacred?

I wouldn’t think they are, but your response seems to indicate otherwise.

Of those “1 billion +” Catholics accounted for in the Yearbook…do you suppose I as an ex-Catholic am gratuitously included?

Do you suppose that the 2/3 of my local church…which are ex-Catholics…are all included as well?

…

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

Fr. Richard John Neuhaus puts it this way: One is a member of the Catholic Church if one is in communion with a Bishop who is himself in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Is the Pope a Catholic?

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

There was no argument made.
Of those “1 billion +” Catholics accounted for in the Yearbook…do you suppose I as an ex-Catholic am gratuitously included?

Do you suppose that the 2/3 of my local church…which are ex-Catholics…are all included as well?

…

There was a fashion a year or so back for repudiating baptism and asking for one’s name to be removed from the rolls. However it never really caught on. There are vast numbers of people who are baptised as Catholics but attend never or only rarely. So when a sociologist asks for membership figures it all depends what he means. When the Church or God asks for membership, of course they mean those who are baptised.

 

[Sixtus]

Please brothers and sisters let us not argue. Lets pray for each other and wish each other well at this great feast and time of year.

 

[TheApologist]

There’s also the CIA factbook. I’m not sure how they calculate it but…

2004 est. Roman Catholics alone…17.33% of the world population

World population: July 2006 est. 6,525,170,264

17.33 percent of 6,525,170,264= 1,130,812,006

I have absolutely no idea what the error rate on this is…but why is it so important anyway how many Catholics are in the world?

 

[eliasaph99]

There was no argument made. Thus no counter argument.

I said it was bad research.

Still remains so, IMO.

I already know how the statistic is determined. That was never in question.

What I proceeded to ask Gottle is how did HE suppose who they included in such a number.

You really hate people questioning data that everyone is just supposed to blindly nod their head at, don’t you?

It is interesting that questioning one number could produce such a backlash. Are the conclusions of the Statistical Yearbook of the Church sacred?

I wouldn’t think they are, but your response seems to indicate otherwise.

Of those “1 billion +” Catholics accounted for in the Yearbook…do you suppose I as an ex-Catholic am gratuitously included?

Do you suppose that the 2/3 of my local church…which are ex-Catholics…are all included as well?

…

No. I don’t think you’re included in the statistic.

If you’re not an active registered member of a parish, I don’t see why you would be.