Who is a Catholic?

[adrift]

I have been bothered for some time by posters who tell other posters your not Catholic and don’t call yourself Catholic. Now this might not be an exact quote but the gist is there.

I get frustrated to with those who present their thoughts as if it were Catholic belief. Most times they ignore authentic Catholic Teaching. I don’t mean those here who present it but actual documents of the Church. I understand that there are those here who come to learn about Catholic belief and it is maddening to see false statements about our Church from those who are Catholic.

I don’t think it is wise to tell those posters you should not identify yourself as Catholic. I grieve when I see it. I grieve when I see posters change their identification because of this.

I have been following a poster who not only changed the ID but religion as well. That poster though has returned to attending a Catholic Church but still does not espouse Catholic teaching. No longer posting here we no longer have the ability to give the true teaching and that poster no longer is exposed to true Catholic thought.

We can’t help those with doubts if we say you aren’t Catholic.

There is the problem of misleading others but cant’ we do that while not endangering the faith?

There are those who don’t believe that Catholics can support the death penalty and those who believe they can. Neither group should be labeled as not being Catholic. We should listen and educate not condemn.

This is not intended as a criticism but a plea not to endanger others progress to God.

I would hope that those who have changed the classification from Catholic to change it back.
The poster I mentioned who left the Church for awhile influenced me to change my ID but I later realized that I shouldn’t let anyone dissuade me from being Catholic. No one has the right to say you are not Catholic. They do have the right to point out why it isn’t or may not be Catholic thought.

I wish to add that those who have called others not Catholic are among the ones who I search out their post because they are knowledgeable in the Faith.

 

[livingwordunity]

Someone who rejects the essential teachings of the Church and then stops calling their beliefs “Catholic” is being honest about their beliefs. At least this way people don’t get misled by them and know that their opinions are not what is taught by the Catholic Church. I would have no problem with them continuing to attend Mass as long as they don’t cause scandal by going up for Holy Communion.

 

[Holly3278]

A Catholic is a person who has been baptized and confirmed in the Catholic Church or who has been received into full communion with the Catholic Church.

 

[adrift]

Someone who rejects the essential teachings of the Church and then stops calling their beliefs “Catholic” is being honest about their beliefs. At least this way people don’t get misled by them and know that their opinions are not what is taught by the Catholic Church. I would have no problem with them continuing to attend Mass as long as they don’t cause scandal by going up for Holy Communion.

I understand your position.

But when someone is on a thread of being a practicing Catholic and we cut it by saying they are not Catholic enough makes me cry.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

A better question is, who can say who is, and is not, a Catholic authoritatively?

We all have faults, sins, and if that keeps one from being Catholic, there are no Catholics.

Those who claim others are not Catholic make a presentation of self righteousness over everyone else, in my opinion. It’s like saying, ‘so and so is not as righteous as I am, and they never will be so they can’t be Catholic.’

 

[martininthefiel]

A Catholic is a person who has been baptized and confirmed in the Catholic Church or who has been received into full communion with the Catholic Church.

:amen::amen::amen:

 

[snarflemike]

A better question is, who can say who is, and is not, a Catholic authoritatively?

We all have faults, sins, and if that keeps one from being Catholic, there are no Catholics.

Those who claim others are not Catholic make a presentation of self righteousness over everyone else, in my opinion. It’s like saying, ‘so and so is not as righteous as I am, and they never will be so they can’t be Catholic.’

I don’t think the issue is our sins, our inability to live up to Catholic teachings. The problem the OP is referencing, if obliquely, comes when Catholics don’t even accept Catholic teachings as valid. And example would be Kathleen Sibelius. Is her bishop being self-righteous by telling her not to present herself for Communion, due to her flagrant rejection of central Catholic teaching?

As Mt 18:17 says, “And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I don’t think the issue is our sins, our inability to live up to Catholic teachings. The problem the OP is referencing, if obliquely, comes when Catholics don’t even accept Catholic teachings as valid. And example would be Kathleen Sibelius. Is her bishop being self-righteous by telling her not to present herself for Communion, due to her flagrant rejection of central Catholic teaching?

As Mt 18:17 says, “And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

Maybe you missed my point. The bishops are a part of the authoritative men of the Church. What we have on these forums is laypersons ‘assuming’ authority. A good example is the verse you posted, which is from a passage instructing the Apostles on Church matters. Christ spoke to the multitudes and there were times He only addressed His Apostles. The verse you quoted comes from a passage only spoken to them.

Also, did the bishop tell her she was no longer a ‘Catholic’, or was she considered still a ‘Catholic’ but not in good standing?

 

[snarflemike]

Maybe you missed my point. The bishops are a part of the authoritative men of the Church. What we have on these forums is laypersons ‘assuming’ authority. A good example is the verse you posted, which is from a passage instructing the Apostles on Church matters. Christ spoke to the multitudes and there were times He only addressed His Apostles. The verse you quoted comes from a passage only spoken to them.

No I didn’t miss your point, and nobody is assuming any authority, thinking they actually have the power to declare who is or who is not Catholic. Take a poll if you don’t believe me.

I made a corresponding point, which is that there are Catholics who espouse heresy, and that damages the Church, and any Catholic (any non-Catholic too) should feel free to point out when heresy is being espoused.

So let me ask directly: is it permissible to point out what one believes to be heresy, or is that never permissible?

 

[snarflemike]

FWIW, here is something relevant from the Catechism (see, I’m appealing to legitimate authority )

Faith

2087 Our moral life has its source in faith in God who reveals his love to us. St. Paul speaks of the "obedience of faith"9 as our first obligation. He shows that “ignorance of God” is the principle and explanation of all moral deviations.10 Our duty toward God is to believe in him and to bear witness to him.

2088 The first commandment requires us to nourish and protect our faith with prudence and vigilance, and to reject everything that is opposed to it. There are various ways of sinning against faith:

Voluntary doubt about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. Involuntary doubt refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity. If deliberately cultivated doubt can lead to spiritual blindness.

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. “Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

No I didn’t miss your point, and nobody is assuming any authority, thinking they actually have the power to declare who is or who is not Catholic. Take a poll if you don’t believe me.

I made a corresponding point, which is that there are Catholics who espouse heresy, and that damages the Church, and any Catholic (any non-Catholic too) should feel free to point out when heresy is being espoused.

So let me ask directly: is it permissible to point out what one believes to be heresy, or is that never permissible?

Any Catholic feeling free to point when heresy is being espoused is circumventing the authoritative Church Christ built, as well as the very passage you quoted. A person espousing, what one believes to be, heresy should be taken to the Church for an authoritative disposition. Then laypersons have an authoritative source to quote from. We, laypersons, cannot assume a teaching wrong without knowing what the Church teaches.

 

[snarflemike]

Any Catholic feeling free to point when heresy is being espoused is circumventing the authoritative Church Christ built, as well as the very passage you quoted. A person espousing, what one believes to be, heresy should be taken to the Church for an authoritative disposition. Then laypersons have an authoritative source to quote from. We, laypersons, cannot assume a teaching wrong without knowing what the Church teaches.

So if a Catholic claims that abortion is not against the teachings of the Catholic Church, we cannot dispute that claim?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

So if a Catholic claims that abortion is not against the teachings of the Catholic Church, we cannot dispute that claim?

See, you’re using a point already defined by the authoritative Church. A point that was not defined solely by laypersons. Once we start assuming that authority upon ourselves, we slip close to Protestant views of how doctrines are arrived at.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

So if a Catholic claims that abortion is not against the teachings of the Catholic Church, we cannot dispute that claim?

I wanted to clarify this point further.

The same as the Church defines teachings, and doctrines, only the Church can say someone is no longer Catholic. As far as I know, the Church refuses someone communion, but does not say that person is no longer a Catholic. If that person goes to confession, with a contrite heart, the Church would not withhold communion from that person. It would not require another baptism into the Church.

 

[snarflemike]

See, you’re using a point already defined by the authoritative Church. A point that was not defined solely by laypersons. Once we start assuming that authority upon ourselves, we slip close to Protestant views of how doctrines are arrived at.

I didn’t notice that anybody was talking about teachings not promulgated by the Church. If that is what’s under discussion, than I agree that we cannot say X is or is not Church teaching unless the Church actually teaches X or teaches against X.

There are also those issues that fall to prudence, such as the issue of the death penalty, and when the Church allows room for different understandings, we should of course allow room as well.

So perhaps we were agreeing all the time.

 

[snarflemike]

I wanted to clarify this point further.

The same as the Church defines teachings, and doctrines, only the Church can say someone is no longer Catholic. As far as I know, the Church refuses someone communion, but does not say that person is no longer a Catholic.

I agree that saying so-and-so is not Catholic is of course not ours to say. People should be more precise and say, rather, that such-and-such view is not Catholic teaching, or that it directly contradicts Catholic teaching. But they had better know what the Church teaches before making such a claim.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I didn’t notice that anybody was talking about teachings not promulgated by the Church. If that is what’s under discussion, than I agree that we cannot say X is or is not Church teaching unless the Church actually teaches X or teaches against X.

There are also those issues that fall to prudence, such as the issue of the death penalty, and when the Church allows room for different understandings, we should of course allow room as well.

So perhaps we were agreeing all the time.

I think we are agreeing, but I was being clumsy about how I explained it.

We can tell others what the Church teaches, but we do not have the authority to tell someone they are not Catholic, even if they are going against a Church teaching. Like I explained above, the Church does not make such a declaration.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I agree that saying so-and-so is not Catholic is of course not ours to say. People should be more precise and say, rather, that such-and-such view is not Catholic teaching, or that it directly contradicts Catholic teaching. But they had better know what the Church teaches before making such a claim.

 

[snarflemike]

We can tell others what the Church teaches, but we do not have the authority to tell someone they are not Catholic, even if they are going against a Church teaching. Like I explained above, the Church does not make such a declaration.

Total agreement.

 

[DavidFilmer]

For what it’s worth, I have been on these forums for MANY years and I have never observed the type of comment you mention. Not even once - and I am quite sure about that (mainly because I would have challenged the comment, using the 100% complete and accurate description that Holly3278 provided in post #3.