What teachings would the Catholic Church have to drop for you to be a catholic

[RebeccaJ]

Since none of my fellow non-Catholics has ventured into this minefield, I’ll throw caution to the winds and venture an answer or two.

First and foremost, the basics of Christian faith as set forth in the three ecumenical creeds are not a problem. As a Lutheran, I believe them with all my heart.

Second, with regard to the Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, I don’t regard them as articles of faith. Despite that, I don’t find them objectionable as pious opinions. I just don’t understand them to be essential to my faith as a Christian. Given that, I would probably be seen as a “cafeteria Catholic” were I to convert.

Third, and last for now, as a Lutheran pastor I do not believe, and cannot accept, the Catholic position that the Eucharist, as celebrated in the Lutheran Church, is invalid. By the same token, I do not believe that my ordination is equally invalid because it does not fall within the Catholic Church’s definition of validity. I don’t expect the Catholic Church to change its teachings on these subjects, but they remain an obstacle to my possible conversion.

Having said that, there is much about the Catholic Church that I admire – even a few things that I envy. And, I certainly wouldn’t hang around this forum if I didn’t find much to challenge and to support my faith.

You’d make a fine Catholicl deacon.

 

[PJM]

=The Iambic Pen;4898273]People bring this up quite a bit, but it simply isn’t true. The Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church had split approximately 500 years before the Protestant Reformation. Even before that split, there had been others, divisions which remain to this day.

It is convenient for Catholic apologists to say that before Martin Luther, there was one united Church, free from dissent and division. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

I am not saying anything against the Catholic Church in this post. It may very well be the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I just think people should refrain from claiming that Christianity was one united communion before 1517.

Thanks, well said.

However it does not change the fact. Orthodox are part of the Catholic Community, you are in Schism, but retain Apolostolic Succession and the Seven Sacraments, thus I try to remeber to use the word “Catholic,” which includes ALL Catholics, non Orthodox and Orthodox. At times I speak of the RCC, but not in this context.

Love and prayers,

 

[4Squarebaby]

1. How do Lutherans “view” or “believe” the story about Mary? Her birth, the Holy Spirit upon her, and do they believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus?

Again my questions are not to cause a “debate”, I’m just wondering how the Lutheran Church believes. I like to try and understand how others believe, although I may not always believe the same thing, it still helps to “listen to” and “respect” how others believe.

I truely believe that if more “Christian Religons” took the time to “understand and listen” to each other, truely we could make bring more “souls” to our Heavenly Father. Instead today many Christians Religions are too busy “bashing” each other and not taking the time to truely “Learn” from each other.

As a representative of yet another denomination I have never heard of any Christians, or Muslims for that matter, denying the virgin birth of Jesus. It is the continueing virginity of Mary after His birth which is in question.

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

Thanks, well said.

However it does not change the fact. Orthodox are part of the Catholic Community, you are in Schism, but retain Apolostolic Succession and the Seven Sacraments, thus I try to remeber to use the word “Catholic,” which includes ALL Catholics, non Orthodox and Orthodox. At times I speak of the RCC, but not in this context.

Love and prayers,

Well, the “you” word can’t refer to me personally, as I am not Orthodox. I am in schism from the Catholic Church, I admit, as a Protestant, but that isn’t a state of affairs I find ideal.

Personally, when I use the word “Catholic,” I use it specifically to refer to that Church which is in communion with the Bishop of Rome. It does limit confusion, I find. I would actually like very much to be Catholic myself. It’s a process, however, and one not simply completed.

I will say that the Protestant Reformation was a separation of a far different kind than the previous schisms. It involved the definite rejection of previously held belief and the invention of new doctrines. The splits between the Catholics and the Orthodox were more, I think, a case of the East and West growing apart in their theology over time.

 

[a_cermak]

Does truth matter? can their be your truth and my truth?

Love and prayers:heart:

Some things are true because there is evidence, such as in the case of science where repeatable experiments are performed and evidence is gathered to support a hypothesis. Or in the case of events that have a lot of witnesses.

I’ve yet to see a religion that has a lot of evidence for it, or that, perhaps more importantly, has more or better evidence than all the other religions out there. Judaism is an old religion, but so, frankly is Hinduism, and I see no better claim for either of them. Christianity has the gospels, but Islam has its Koran and LDS its Book of Mormon. I don’t think age is necessarily an indicator of anything as one can simply be following a very old error. The Pastafarians may be a little on the obnoxious side, but they make a good point, that, in our Republic, no religion is any superior or inferior to any other.

When it comes to faith, I like to consider religion a Constitutionally protected opinion. Truth would only apply if there is evidence that could apply. So yes, I have my truth that is specific to me, my faith reflects how I live my life. You have an entirely different truth that informs your ethics and lifestyle. I see no problem with this.

 

[Protestant101]

I would bet that if Protestant 101 examined most other Protestant Denominations, he would find that the majority of them are more like Catholics than his denomination.

This is actually an interesting thread. At least to me it is.

Actually, that is quite true. And I find it interesting that Ellen White predicted that back in the 1800s.

 

[Protestant101]

I was working under the impression that Jesus was the central figure in all christian churches and so therefore we must have 95 % at least in common with one another.

I also belive the Jesus is disappointed that his church is split into different groups each of which seems to try to identify its own version of the truth.

Do you belive that Jesus would want us to remain apart forever and not even try to find common ground?

Catholics dont want “common ground.” They want submission to the Pope

 

[Peter_J]

That isn’t what he is asking. He is asking non-Catholics to answer to know what it would take.

That’s how I read the question also.

 

[orange_man]

That’s sort of a loaded question … I assume the OP means what would it take for me to become Roman Catholic, to which my response is nothing. I’d never leave the Presbyterian church (though I don’t really care to explain why … that’s never a kind conversation so it’s one I avoid).

 

[Protestant101]

I find your responce very candid and from my Catholic perspective a bit confusing.

"There cannot be you truth and my truth, for this would mean that their is NO TRUTH."

Does truth matter? can their be your truth and my truth?

Love and prayers:heart:

The Pope comes up with some pretty clever sayings to try and lend credence to his dogma of the whole world submitting to him. Only one problem. This phrase makes no sense.

 

[Peter_J]

There is not so much in common with Catholics and the rest of the Christian world as some would have us believe.

For what it’s worth, there are many Catholics who’d agree with you.

 

[ralphinal]

Actually, that is quite true. And I find it interesting that Ellen White predicted that back in the 1800s.

At least you are honest about that.

It was not much of a prophacy. It was just as true then as it is now. It was true from day one of the SDA movement and it will be true when the Lord calls us all home.

 

[Protestant101]

At least you are honest about that.

It was not much of a prophacy. It was just as true then as it is now. It was true from day one of the SDA movement and it will be true when the Lord calls us all home.

To be specific, she predicted something else, and this fact you mention was mentioned in that prediction; so yes, not truly a prediction. Just a statement of fact. However, I would say it is much more true now than then that Protestants, in most cases, would now make good Catholics

 

[ralphinal]

To be specific, she predicted something else, and this fact you mention was mentioned in that prediction; so yes, not truly a prediction. Just a statement of fact. However, I would say it is much more true now than then that Protestants, in most cases, would now make good Catholics

Maybe, but some of that is because there are a lot of Catholics who are not good at being Catholic, either.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Iambic Pen,

I don’t think the Catholic Church should change anything, on my account. If, in an alternate universe, the Catholic Church had never defined Purgatory, the Immaculate Conception, and Papal Infallibility, it would be much easier for me to become Catholic. It is difficult for me to accept the concept that these were always believed, just not yet defined, when they are not and were not believed by the Orthodox. I am also a little concerned about what teachings might be dogmatically defined in the future.

Regarding Purgatory, there is really no division on the matter. The DOGMA of Purgatory as proposed by the Catholic Church is acceptable to the Orthodox. There are, however, certain Latin doctrinal precepts (NOT dogma) about Purgatory that are not acceptable to the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox, and even to Eastern/Oriental Catholics. But what the Catholic Church as a whole teaches DOGMATICALLY about Purgatory is not in contention at all, so that should be one less stress off your mind.

The dogma of the Immaculate Conception has no rational objection from the Orthodox, but are objections based on misconceptions. In fact, I know many Orthodox (Eastern and Oriental) who accept it as theologoumenon. I little more study, I think, will help you on the matter. Here is a link to a discussion I started which I hope will be helpful (if you have not read it yet):
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=299559&highlight=Immaculate+Conception

The dogma of papal infallibility, like so many other things Catholic, is rejected MOSTLY because of misconceptions and exaggerations. However, I do think that the Orthodox have a (very) few genuine and valid concerns about it. I would be glad to answer your questions on the matter.

Regarding matters being dogmatically defined in the future, as you will notice, dogmas are never pronounced without support from the Church as a whole in the first place. It’s a very slow process, but I believe it is much better than the “believe what you want to believe” mentality that pervades Protestantism, and, to some extent, the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Protestant101]

Maybe, but some of that is because there are a lot of Catholics who are not good at being Catholic, either.

LOL, I am not so sure about that. Most Catholics are pretty good at it!

 

[Protestant101]

For what it’s worth, there are many Catholics who’d agree with you.

Do you think they would agree for different reasons - some good, some not?

 

[ralphinal]

LOL, I am not so sure about that. Most Catholics are pretty good at it!

Then you do not know many catholics…or have not ever seen the News about Catholic politicians. You could add up all they know about the faith, turn it into gasoline adn not have enough fuel to start a fire with an atom bomb.

 

[ICA04]

There seems to be so much in common across all Christians that i wondered what would need to be changed about the Catholic church before you would consider converting e.g. stop the focus on Mary as key for many but what else would need to change…

Papal authority and infallibility (and I do know the difference)

The ridiculous Mary veneration and dogmas.

Many unspecific church behavioral customs.

 

[StephenFrancis]

I am what is termed a Cafeteria Catholic. Getting me out of the cafeteria line would be attained by two things:

Permitting oral sex in married couples - iow, the man does not HAVE to finish his act in the vagina of his wife.
Permitting non-abortive birth control methods i.e. condom and spermicide.

The issue here is OBEDIENCE, not birth control methods. However, as to the sexual issue, I believe I am correct in saying that oral sex IS allowed as long as it is a form of foreplay so that it does not become an end in itself. But if that stops you from being a “fully Catholic” person, then even if they changed it some other issue would inevitably arise to keep you from leaving the cafeteria anyway. Yours is a heart issue. Are you WILLING to obey–that is the real issue in my opinion. This is coming from a same sex attracted male who didnt bargain on the Church stopping me from the gay lifestyle but at some point I had to make that choice. And the Eucharist is worth every minute of it. God bless!