Why are you not Catholic?

[Birdpreacher]

Hi, thanks for sharing!
I was thinking like you for a good while but I found it depressed me.

I’m an extremist really, so with no God I became a nihilist. I can’t live like that- everything becomes pointless.

So… Here I am embracing God, and Jesus. I just can’t seem to embrace Catholicism a la Catholic Answers (which strikes me as somewhat fundamentalist) because I’m a natural doubter…

Hi:

For me it was the opposite. Once I discovered that there was no Big Gigantic Meaning to life, or more importantly, that I could not turn to anybody, beside myself to define my purpose and goals in existence, it was liberating.

For me, I get the most personal fulfilment from building relationships and helping people. These are the compass points that guide my life.

Read the Myth of Sisyphus by Camus, this is what helped me embrace the notion of navigating life with a focus on maximizing your limited existence rather than allowing the ideas of others to exercise unquestioned authority over your day to day life.

 

[Tomdstone]

Out of curiosity what exactly has a Pope decreed that you can’t agree with? When you say Universal Jurisdiction I am taking that to mean infallibility and my finding is that most people don’t really have a correct understanding of that term.

There has only been two "ex cathedra’ teachings since the inception of the Church and those are:

The Immaculate Conception
The Assumption of Mary

Other than that the Church only says that the Pope is infallible when teaching on morals and faith but I’ve never seen anything I could argue with. Therefore I am curious if it is just the general concept or if you have a specific example.

Thanks

E. Orthodox do not accept universal jurisdiction of the Pope.

 

[Micosil]

I am not flogged or tortured but I have been called out in meetings where I work to explain why Pope Benedict was elected because he was a Jew hating Nazi (not my words) why Pope John Paul II was euthanized by church officials, all priests are pedophiles, on and on. I heard a lady telling friends of mine that our bishop was plotting to take over the hospitals in our city. When I say people in my part of Texas hate Catholics I mean they truly believe that we are evil. Not all but a large enough portion that I don’t share my faith unless I know for certain that they are sane. A baptist man asked me if I wanted to go to a singles party until he found out I was, duh duh duhhhh, a Catholic.

Bleh, sounds like typical anti-Catholic bigotry. What’s funny is that all of those “facts” are always debunked with simple history and research.

 

[Tomdstone]

1. I’m happy with my UU church.

That having been said, there are some things that I do admire about the church, particularly its respect for philosophy and tradition of mysticism.

The UU Church is quite liberal and pluralistic, is it not?

 

[Kmon23]

I think there’s strong evidence for both to be honest. That’s why in the end I left it up for God and found, as you say “Catholics aren’t as fellowship oriented as Protestants.”

Edit- actually I wouldn’t say that’s entirely true. I see that Catholics hang out with other Catholics in their families and schools; but still don’t take it seriously.

In my neighborhood there’s literally no difference between Catholic parents who send their kids to Catholic schools, and public parents.

I don’t get where the heart is to let everyone know about Jesus? Why is it so lacking?

I respect your choice as it is your own. However, finding about Christianity besides Protestantism, I knew that in my search for the true church (or God finding me) the people in the parish is not the important thing. It’s about what I believed, and whether the church I followed is the continuation of Christ’s church, as we should worship in spirit and truth. I love the parish I am in, with incredible faith filled people, and it is truly a blessing from God. However, I also understand that there are probably many other parishes that may not have the same passion found here. I would equally apply this with Catholics as well. The community was not as helpful during my own journey when I almost became Catholic, but I also recognized that somewhere else in the world, such as South America or Africa, their faith is incredible.
Just my opinion.

E. Orthodox do not accept universal jurisdiction of the Pope.

And to the person you responded, Orthodox also accept the Assumption (Dormition) of the Theotokos. Furthermore we also profess the sinlessness of the Theotokos (although not the Immaculate Conception, as we believe she still had ancestral sin).

And as to why I am not Catholic, I almost became baptized Catholic this year’s Easter vigil. However, during my time as a candidate, Orthodoxy continued to be a thorn in my side, that it became something I could no longer ignore. I sort of went back to the drawing board, and my heart ended up with a different conclusion as I discerned for a second time, this time Orthodoxy.

However along a purely intellectual side, I guess I later did not accept Papal Supremacy and Papal Infallibility. Although to be sure, I did not have any bias or problems in accepting these initially. I absorbed and believed these things like a sponge. However discerning further I came to the conclusion that this was not part of the Christian faith, and hence I am now with Orthodoxy.

 

[NowHereThis]

The UU Church is quite liberal and pluralistic, is it not?

Definitely. Our metaphysical interests and opinions vary widely. But we have a common core of liberal values such as human dignity, democracy, personal responsibility (with community assistance) to find truth, peace, justice, and respect for the interdependent web of existence (an ecological approach to life).

 

[WT1]

Universal jurisdiction and papal infallibility are not the same concept.

I was not familiar with the term so I researched it and now have a better understanding. I think it is pretty clear that Christ gave Peter the keys to the kingdom and made him custodian of the faithful. Had he intended that ultimate responsibility to be shared he would have done so but chose not to.

Thank you for pointing out the misunderstanding on my part.

 

[Cake_or_Death]

Hi,

It’s still me asking questions, if you didn’t notice.

I too have great difficulty with the way the Church and many in it speak about gays and lesbians. It seems to be greatly lacking in love.

I did, I must say I admire your devotion to findig the right path for you. It’s nice to see someone paying such close consideration to matters of faith and the heart.

It’s not so much that I think the Catholic Church’s opinion on homosexuality is “lacking in love” as you put it, I think it is fundamentaly mistaken and that a happy same sex marriage is as wonderful and admirable a sight to behold as a heterosexual marriage.

I cannot profess to be of the 60’s lovechild “love is all you need” type of person, but I personally cannot accept the idea that a woman and a woman or a man and a man who feel a love that so many people go their entire lifetimes without ever discovering are in sin for doing so or acting upon.

As the Catholic Church is in opposition in to that, as much pain and sadness as it brings me personally I must stand in opposition to the will of the Catholic Church and defend them. Part of the reason I entered a Lutheran seminary actually, I wanted to show people that what they came to see as bad about Christianity wasn’t actually part of Christianity as a whole . To try and preserve the faith if you like.

Please don’t think my all of my objections to Catholicism are wrapped up in same sex marriage, far from it! There were issues for me such as the doctrine of complementarity long before same sex marriage became a pressing issue in my life.

 

[Tomdstone]

I did, I must say I admire your devotion to findig the right path for you. It’s nice to see someone paying such close consideration to matters of faith and the heart.

It’s not so much that I think the Catholic Church’s opinion on homosexuality is “lacking in love” as you put it, I think it is fundamentaly mistaken and that a happy same sex marriage is as wonderful and admirable a sight to behold as a heterosexual marriage.

I cannot profess to be of the 60’s lovechild “love is all you need” type of person, but I personally cannot accept the idea that a woman and a woman or a man and a man who feel a love that so many people go their entire lifetimes without ever discovering are in sin for doing so or acting upon.

As the Catholic Church is in opposition in to that, as much pain and sadness as it brings me personally I must stand in opposition to the will of the Catholic Church and defend them. Part of the reason I entered a Lutheran seminary actually, I wanted to show people that what they came to see as bad about Christianity wasn’t actually part of Christianity as a whole . To try and preserve the faith if you like.

Please don’t think my all of my objections to Catholicism are wrapped up in same sex marriage, far from it! There were issues for me such as the doctrine of complementarity long before same sex marriage became a pressing issue in my life.

I suppose another stumbling block would be the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on artificial birth control. It is a mortal sin to use ABC even for a married couple with six children. I doubt that you will find many Protestants agreeing with that.

 

[Kmon23]

I suppose another stumbling block would be the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on artificial birth control. It is a mortal sin to use ABC even for a married couple with six children. I doubt that you will find many Protestants agreeing with that.

What does the acronym stand for?

 

[Tomdstone]

What does the acronym stand for?

ABC - Artificial Birth Control.

 

[D0UBTFIRE]

What does the acronym stand for?

Artificial birth control

 

[Memaw]

Out of curiosity what exactly has a Pope decreed that you can’t agree with? When you say Universal Jurisdiction I am taking that to mean infallibility and my finding is that most people don’t really have a correct understanding of that term.

There has only been two "ex cathedra’ teachings since the inception of the Church and those are:

The Immaculate Conception
The Assumption of Mary

Other than that the Church only says that the Pope is infallible when teaching on morals and faith but I’ve never seen anything I could argue with. Therefore I am curious if it is just the general concept or if you have a specific example.

Thanks

Ex Cathedra is when the Pope defines doctrine, (Better explains it solemnly), (Dogma. Infallibility covers much more than Ex Cathedra. The Pope is Infallible when teaching Faith,( what we believe) and Morals,( how we live our belief.) and when Canonizing a Saint, also Councils decisions signed by the Pope. The Teaching Magisterium of the Church is Infallible. One needs to learn what Infallibility really means. God Bless, Memaw

 

[JonNC]

I was not familiar with the term so I researched it and now have a better understanding. I think it is pretty clear that Christ gave Peter the keys to the kingdom and made him custodian of the faithful. Had he intended that ultimate responsibility to be shared he would have done so but chose not to.

Thank you for pointing out the misunderstanding on my part.

First, you have an obligation to believe what your Church teaches about the keys.
Second, I think a discussion at length about this might derail the thread. So, briefly:

I believe that you are right, and wrong. Yes, Peter receives the keys directly from Christ:

Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock 2 I will build my church, and the gates of hell 3 shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed 4 in heaven.”

But he repeats this again to all the disciples in Matt 18:

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

The Keys belong to the Church.

Jon

 

[Memaw]

Hi,

It’s still me asking questions, if you didn’t notice.

I too have great difficulty with the way the Church and many in it speak about gays and lesbians. It seems to be greatly lacking in love.

Love is not condoning one’s sins but trying to help them avoid the occasion of sin altogether. That’s real love. Misguided compassion is not love. God Bless, Memaw

 

[JonNC]

Love is not condoning one’s sins but trying to help them avoid the occasion of sin altogether. That’s real love. Misguided compassion is not love. God Bless, Memaw

I generally agree. We can speak and treat people with love and compassion, but accepting as ok actions that are not ok in the eyes of God is not we’re expected to do.

Jon

 

[Micosil]

First, you have an obligation to believe what your Church teaches about the keys.
Second, I think a discussion at length about this might derail the thread. So, briefly:

I believe that you are right, and wrong. Yes, Peter receives the keys directly from Christ:

But he repeats this again to all the disciples in Matt 18:

The Keys belong to the Church.

Jon

That isn’t what the keys really mean.

The keys Jesus is refering to in verse 19 is a reference to the keys found in Isaiah 22:

19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be cast down from your station. 20 In that day I will call my servant Eli′akim the son of Hilki′ah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

This key refers to the royal Davidic line, it gives absolute authority. The people around Jesus would have known that this is the context of those keys that are given to Peter, as they would have been familiar with the Hebrew scriptures. They represent, thus, the authority given to a minister, vizier, steward, or chamberlain over a royal household in ancient Israel.

When Christ says to Peter, “whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven,” he is speaking in rabbinic terminology; a rabbi could declare an act forbidden or excommunicate a person, or declare that an act was allowed, and reestablish communion with an excommunicated person.

Note for instance how in other instances when Jesus gives similar authority to people elsewhere in the Gospels (such as Matthew 18:18) he is speaking to the Apostles in general, and not the Peter specifically, and no mentions of keys are made in those instances.

The Isaiah 22 reference is a dynastic authority which also implies a dynastic office, an office that cannot be just declared vacant and forgotten when the first person to occupy it dies. In Isaiah 22, Shebna is kicked out, the steward’s office is left empty, and Eli′akim is called to fill it. Thus, when a Pope, the bishop of Rome dies, or resigns, it is an office that is left empty, and someone needs to fill it.

 

[Patti_M]

Bleh, sounds like typical anti-Catholic bigotry. What’s funny is that all of those “facts” are always debunked with simple history and research.

Yes, they are all easy to research and simple to debunk but some people love to hate. that’s the hardest part to accept, people would rather hate the church rather learn about her. I don’t mean to sound like this happens all the time…but just enough to make you hesitant to confidently share your faith with a stranger. Even our parish priest would not wear his cleric garb out in public. He would never say why, but he must have had a very bad experience.

 

[spedteacherita]

Any of you come “this close” to embracing Catholicism, but haven’t been able to? How come?

Did any of you start as Catholic but ended up converting to Eastern Orthodox or Anglican or Lutheran or something else? Why?

Any of you “cafeteria Catholics” and are comfortable with it? How did you reconcile that?

Just trying to find my place in this world!

I have been Lutheran since I was 22 years old, went to a Lutheran College, and spent 7 years teaching in Lutheran schools.

I’m here because I discovered EWTN and the programming there gave me a lot to think about and then I discovered CAF. I have some wonderful friends who have put up with my ignorance about Catholicism but I can’t be quite convinced that some of the things included with Tradition goes all the way back to the Apostles. I love Mary as Jesus’ mother but I can’t commit to the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption. I also do not believe that one can pray to people who are dead to get Jesus or God to intercede on my behalf for my petition. I, at this point, only believe that my living family, friends, prayer warriors and myself can and do intercede to our Father in Heaven.

I hope this “confession” of sorts doesn’t get me kicked off CAF because I believe that it’s important to learn about other Christian groups as well as maybe I am wrong and find out down the road some facts that will change my mind.

God bless all!!

Rita

 

[Contarini]

Any of you come “this close” to embracing Catholicism, but haven’t been able to?

Me, a number of times, including this past year. The main reasons are:

1. I believe that all baptized Christians who believe in the Trinity are members of the visible Catholic Church. This doesn’t, in theory, have to prevent my becoming Catholic. Vatican II grants as much, with the caveat that they are imperfectly united to the Church. I don’t have a problem with that caveat. Any doubts I have concern not the imperfection of our union to the Church but the claim that Catholicism as a visible institution shows forth the fullness of the Faith, which I’m not sure is true in any practical, observable way. (I.e., maybe we’re all just “imperfectly united to the Church,” Catholics and Protestants alike.) But even that isn’t really the issue. The main issue practically is the requirement not to receive communion in Protestant churches. Since I believe Protestant churches are true (if imperfect) expressions of the church, I can’t in good conscience do anything that would divide me from them. If I were already Catholic, I would certainly not leave, and would think God for my good fortune. But since I can’t see in any verifiable way that on the concrete, local level Catholic parishes embody the fullness of the Faith while Protestant congregations don’t, I find it hard to leave the latter for the former (lumping Episcopalians with Protestants here).
2. Related to this is the issue of women’s ordination, given a personal edge by the fact that my wife is about to be ordained in the Episcopal Church. I am unconvinced by the arguments against women’s ordination. It’s certainly quite possible that I’m wrong, but it’s also possible, it seems to me, that in fact the current official stance will turn out not to be the permanent teaching of the Church. Such things have happened, though people on this forum desperately try to deny the fact. Meanwhile, becoming Catholic would mean not only a breach with my Protestant family and friends in general, but (if I submitted to the authority of the Church, which in good conscience I would feel I had to do) an implicit denial of the validity of my wife’s calling.
3. There are many more specific points where I’m not sure that the Catholic position is correct, from indulgences to the virginity of Mary in partu. None of these are a big deal in themselves, but they conribute to my difficulties with just trusting the Church.

The best way to summarize all of this is that in all the empirical ways I can verify, Catholicism looks like another broken part of the Church, with many strengths that the rest of us can learn from, including the Papacy with whom we should all seek communion. it may be that it is more than this and that I should have more faith.

Edwin