What's the ONE Catholic Doctrine that you disagree with most?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Porknpie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wouldn’t say that I disagree with any doctrine, but I do feel that some aren’t necessarily applied with the charity that they should be - the attitude towards other churches, as other posters have said. I know that this is less of an issue of doctrine, and more of an issue with the way people behave but it still reflects on how the CC is viewed from the outside (Protestant bashing was one of the biggest barriers to me converting).

The other would be (again more an issue of practice than doctrine), that Marian devotion can run away with itself sometimes, and I’ve definitely met people who give the impression that Our Lady is the head of the trinity…
 
Not so much a doctrine as an interpretation. I think that the Greek word porneia in Matthew 5:32 should be released from the artificially narrow translation of “unlawful marriage” and given the same meaning that it has in the rest of the New Testament – “fornication.”

Here is the verse, for those who don’t know what I’m talking about:
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. (KJV)
Click to expand...
 
There are more like 3 that are about equal:
  1. The development of the powers of the bishop of Rome to the point that it is believed that he can speak infallibly at any point he wants. Infallibility only makes sense in looking back at something said, even if it was only a few minutes ago, but to think that he can say, “I will now speak infallibly” seems to have pushed the limits of man even if he be the Bishop of Rome.
  2. The development that it is the norm to partake of only the bread that has become the Body of Christ, and not the wine that has become the Blood of Christ, yet the priest must partake of both. And the people partake of the Body of Christ that was consecrated from previous days and the priest has to partake of the consecrated Body of Christ of the Mass being celebrated. The rules for the priest make sense, it makes no sense that the laity should have different rules if there is nothing making it difficult to do so.
  3. Baptizing infants and not allowing them to be chrismated and receive the Body and Blood of Christ until much later in most of the Catholic Rites.
 
Lenten_ashes said:
I have full understanding, I just don’t like it or agree with how they handle certain things. That’s the topic of the OP.

And I don’t think you understood, entirely, the point I was making. Civil marriages of any variety are VERY CLEARLY not sacramental and should be dismissed immediately and entirely for new converts. But because they are not, those in my circle(anti-Catholic protestants) have their doubts about the Church’s motives, suspecting they are monetarily motivated(btw much more than $200). This makes it even more difficult for converts from protestantism as we have zealot family members/friends already on the attack and the Church seems to inadvertently give them more ammunition.

A example of what I am talking about is my initial conversation with our parish priest. I explained my situation to him and he said 100% chance you get annulled because it’s non sacramental…it’s open and shut. Others had told me the same thing. So in these situations why in the heck are we wasting people’s time and money with this process in these situations? Sacramental marriages are a different story and I understand the long delays for those as thorough investigation is needed and the RCC is a big ship that takes a while to make the turn…

Bottom line, civil marriages by unbaptized are not marriages and anyone can figure that out in about 5 seconds
Click to expand...
The Church still has to make a thorough investigation every time. The priest as well as others may have a personal opinion but that carries NO weight in the official investigation. It’s NOT up to them. The Church doesn’t do things to appease or upset non Catholics but it is very careful with the faith of Catholics. Others have nearly always had misguided opinions of the way the Church works. If they were really interested in the Church they could easily find out for themselves. God Bless, Memaw
 
Lenten_ashes said:
That’s a new implementation by Pope Francis. He gets it and he’s trying to improve things.

Thank God for him. 🙂

I came in before that change was made. Anyway, great start and hopefully they extrapolate on it some more as it’s badly needed.
Click to expand...
The Annulment process was re-vised after my husband got his annulment, Most don’t go to Rome anymore and they ALL used to ), so that’s nothing new but the rules about a Sacramental marriage will always be the same!! Church can’t change that. God Bless, Memaw
 
I’ve been around for a 50+ years, studied a lot, seen a lot. But I don’t think that I have either the wisdom or sagacity to question the teachings of the Saints and Church Fathers.

Disagreeing with the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church is way above my pay grade.
 
Widlast said:
I’ve been around for a 50+ years, studied a lot, seen a lot. But I don’t think that I have either the wisdom or sagacity to question the teachings of the Saints and Church Fathers.

Disagreeing with the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church is way above my pay grade.
Click to expand...
AMEN, God Bless, Memaw
 
Widlast said:
I’ve been around for a 50+ years, studied a lot, seen a lot. But I don’t think that I have either the wisdom or sagacity to question the teachings of the Saints and Church Fathers.

Disagreeing with the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church is way above my pay grade.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, there are plenty of topics on which the saints and the Church Fathers got it wrong. I was reading one just last night – St. Augustin’s claim that marital sex that was not initiated for the purpose of procreation is a venial sin.
 
DaveBj said:
Nevertheless, there are plenty of topics on which the saints and the Church Fathers got it wrong. I was reading one just last night – St. Augustin’s claim that marital sex that was not initiated for the purpose of procreation is a venial sin.
Click to expand...
That was NEVER doctrine!! Opinions even by St.s are NOT doctrine!!! God Bless, Memaw
 
Memaw said:
That was NEVER doctrine!! Opinions even by St.s are NOT doctrine!!! God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
I know that; my point was that it was a teaching by a Saint and Church Father that was wrong, in response to Widlast’s post.
 
Contarini said:
My greatest difficulties are:
  1. Clericalism, particularly as expressed in the teaching that only men can be priests. (This is an expression of clericalism because it rests on the idea that the ministerial priesthood is something qualitatively other than the baptismal priesthood–otherwise no baptized person would be an “invalid subject” for ordination.)
Click to expand...
So Jesus didn’t have the right to establish the ministerial priesthood based on your criteria? Jesus never consulted us or anyone else as to whom he would have as his ministers. The Church can only do and teach what Christ himself taught her.
  1. The juridical and imperial elements in the way papal authority has been expressed, specifically the claims of “plenitudo potestatis” and “universal ordinary jurisdiction.”
Click to expand...
So who should have the authority to speak infallibly on matters of faith and morals? Someone has to have the final say. Jesus didn’t set up a democracy–he wasn’t a Greek. He established a Kingdom with the pope as his steward–to whom he gave the keys to that Kingdom.
  1. The formulation of “negative doctrines” about other churches, which seem like unnecessary and even presumptuous extrapolations from the positive claims which are the proper content of divine revelation. I.e., to say that “Eucharists not celebrated by a priest ordained by a bishop in apostolic succession are invalid” is true in the positive form “we may be confident that Eucharists celebrated by such priests are valid.” There is no need that I can see to make confident claims about what does not happen in other Eucharists.
Click to expand...
There is only one Church established by Christ, and only one authority to decide what is and what isn’t valid expressions of that Church’s doctrines and practices. There aren’t “other churches,” there are only bodies that broke away from that Church to create their own churches. Is it any wonder the Church should rule that those that have left Christ’s one Church have no right to set themselves up in opposition to her and claim rights Christ didn’t give them?
  1. The doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary, particularly in partu, which seems to reflect an over-spiritualized, even Gnostic understanding of the Incarnation, as well as a belief that sex is polluting.
Click to expand...
“Seems to reflect” according to whom? Apparently not according to the Church with the authority to decide matters of doctrine and morals. And where did you get the idea that Mary’s perpetual virginity in any way teaches that “sex is polluting?” Nonsense. The Church has never taught any such thing. Mary remained a virgin because she was sacred to God, set aside for him alone. It has nothing to do with regular and normal sexual relations between husband and wife.
  1. The tendency, from my perspective, to over-define things and insist on these highly defined beliefs as necessary for Christian unity.
Click to expand...
And Protestants don’t “over-define things” when they bring up any and all objections to everything the Church teaches?
Note that these are difficulties, not “disagreements”–it is not my intention to dissent stubbornly from anything authoritatively taught by the Church.
Click to expand...
Edwin
Click to expand...
I think your difficulties lie in thinking that every Protestant body is equal to Christ’s one established Church. They aren’t. They are all right as far as they go and in the things they teach that are true and in encouraging people to have faith in Christ. But that doesn’t make them what only the Church is–the fullest expression of the faith. Nor does it confer on them the authority that Christ gave to his Church alone.
 
I probably have the most trouble understanding original sin as it relates to Adam and Eve. I don’t disagree with it, I just find it hard to understand.
 
Memaw said:
My second husband went thru an annulment many years ago when it had to go to ROME.for the Pope to handle. It was NOT that difficult and it only took a year. There are some expenses to getting an annulment but the Church works with one if they cannot afford it. If I remember right his was less than $200 The Church is not “putting” anyone thru the “ringer”, but is helping us thru a difficult situation. The Church has to be sure there was no Sacramental marriage in the first place before granting an annulment. Civil marriages between a man and a woman are normal even tho not Sacramental. Same sex is not normal and will never be recognized by the Church. The Catholic Church will never defy Christ’s teachings. There is nothing “secret” about the teachings of the Catholic Church, ( and NEVER has been) its all out there in Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the many Councils etc. I pray you will come to a better understanding of the Catholic faith you have embraced. God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
Now they start at $500 if you live in a diocese that still charges. At least that is what my diocese used to charge. Then you have to pay to get copies of any court documents they need. I felt like I was put through the “wringer” and I probably still have another year to go.
 
drac16 said:
The one that christians believe in.
Click to expand...
Can you provide for me the Official original Islamic teaching of what Christianity believe in the Trinity? Would appreciate to have that. 🙂 Also I presume that in Islam the Trinity Christians believe is admitting it is the Catholic teaching of the Trinity.

MJ
 
MartinJordan said:
Can you provide for me the Official original Islamic teaching of what Christianity believe in the Trinity? Would appreciate to have that. 🙂 Also I presume that in Islam the Trinity Christians believe is admitting it is the Catholic teaching of the Trinity.

MJ
Click to expand...
Yes it is the Catholic teaching but where do they get it??? From the Sacred Scriptures!!! God Bless, Memaw
 
drac16 said:
The Trinity.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, most Christians do not have a good understanding of the Trinity themselves and so often explain it in a way which is incorrect.

I think the best and easiest to understand explanation of the Trinity can be found in a book by Frank Sheed called “Theology for Beginners”. If you have a library where you live they probably have a copy of it so you don’t need to buy it. Well worth the read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top