Why are you not Catholic?

[crai7]

I suppose you are also a believer in pre-marital sex?

I’ve heard the same argument you propose by Christian folks who say they love each other and marriage is simply a piece of paper that doesn’t change anything in God’s eyes. It’s in their own head and beyond the reach of any earthly authority to declare them legitimately in love.

They believe they can have sex whenever they want, as long as they love each other.

You are agreed with this?

Pre-marital sex in the OT was NOT license to be promiscuous! It resulted in **automatic **marriage, along with the burdens and obligations of marriage. So yes, God is more concerned with the attitude of heart and behaviour than empty ritual and bits of paper…

 

[crai7]

No your NOT right. You misunderstand what the different Orders really are. And where in the world did you come up with gay nuns for petes sake? Is there no end to things thrown at the Catholic Church either by misunderstandings or at times I think deliberately??? Maybe all Catholics are not faithful to what the Catholic Church teaches, they have a free will, but that doesn’t make them a denomination or it doesn’t make the Catholic Church wrong. Name me one other organization that has lived for over 2,000 years, been thru what the Catholic Church has come thru and still going strong, teaching what Jesus taught, (no caving into Heresy’s or secularism). That should be proof enough that the Catholic Church is protected and guided by the Holy Spirit as Jesus said it would. God Bless, Memaw

The RCC has been around about 1,700 years not over 2,000? Anyway, staying on point, within the RCC as I understand it, there are different ‘orders’; but then at a broader level - the CC level - you could get entirely different Rites.

These Rites, are more than just different in the way they approach sacraments, they sometimes have entirely different hierarchies and entirely separate finances.

For instance, the various Eastern Orthodox churches, or in the distant past the Byzantine Rite… or perhaps even churches just in communion with the RCC such as the Copts - BUT they are still considered Catholic for some reason? Yet Protestant churches are not considered Catholic? If Catholic, really just means ‘universal’ and not beholden specifically to the Roman Rite, then I’m wondering why Protestants aren’t automatically part of the Catholic Church?

 

[crai7]

No, it isn’t, because church is not about having the same views. It’s about being the Bod of Christ.

So you are saying that even if individuals or groups have radically different views they must stay as one body, and even Protestant churches are part of the Catholic Church in the sense of a universal church, not the Roman Rite specifically?

No, although they are not in fact perfectly united. (Not talking about uniformity here, but about the fact that you can have a Latin church and a Byzantine church in the same places, even competing with each other to some extent.) Or more precisely, they are as divided as very close Protestant denominations are, which fully cooperate and recognize each other’s doctrines as true.

Okay, but Latin (Roman) and the modern (not ancient) Byzantine are pretty close, since Byzantines were Eastern Orthodox that turned back to Rome post schism? What about Copts who are only in communion, but have their own hierarchy - or Eastern Orthodox (Serbian/Russian/Greek), who also have their own unique Rites, hierarchy and finances? They are really, in practice, fully independent churches.

I think you exaggerate the divisions between Protestants. It is the **Zipf distribution **in statistics - i.e. the bulk of the congregants go to a few very large denominations that take the lions share, with the remainder going to the rest… the long tail (many of which are not even really denominations, but rather standalone churches).

 

[Micosil]

So you are saying that even if individuals or groups have radically different views they must stay as one body, and even Protestant churches are part of the Catholic Church in the sense of a universal church, not the Roman Rite specifically?

Okay, but Latin (Roman) and the modern (not ancient) Byzantine are pretty close, since Byzantines were Eastern Orthodox that turned back to Rome post schism? What about Copts who are only in communion, but have their own hierarchy - or Eastern Orthodox (Serbian/Russian/Greek), who also have their own unique Rites, hierarchy and finances? They are really, in practice, fully independent churches.

I think you exaggerate the divisions between Protestants. It is the **Zipf distribution **in statistics - i.e. the bulk of the congregants go to a few very large denominations that take the lions share, with the remainder going to the rest… the long tail (many of which are not even really denominations, but rather standalone churches).

There is a big difference between those ancient churches that you mention, and Protestantism – namely, those ancient churches have legitimate Apostolic succession and valid sacraments. These churches are often not in communion with each other (Eastern Orthodox aren’t in communion with Oriental Orthodox (Copts, Armenians, Ethiopian Tewahedo) who aren’t in communion with Assyrian Church of the East, etc.) but at the very least on the question of having legitimate Apostolic succession and valid sacraments, they’re in agreement that these two things are non-negotiables, and cannot be lost.

 

[Memaw]

Well I’m not sure how you could be prevented from partaking in communion/eucharist. Christ didn’t say it depended on a piece of paper or membership in a ‘denomination’. If you’re a Christian then you participate in eating the bread/wafer and wine. Whether you believe it is symbolic or transubstantiation… that’s in your own head and beyond the reach of any earthly authority.

Have you ever checked out any of the Catholic Eucharistic Miracles?? You would know the difference then if you won’t take our word for it. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

The RCC has been around about 1,700 years not over 2,000? Anyway, staying on point, within the RCC as I understand it, there are different ‘orders’; but then at a broader level - the CC level - you could get entirely different Rites.

These Rites, are more than just different in the way they approach sacraments, they sometimes have entirely different hierarchies and entirely separate finances.

For instance, the various Eastern Orthodox churches, or in the distant past the Byzantine Rite… or perhaps even churches just in communion with the RCC such as the Copts - BUT they are still considered Catholic for some reason? Yet Protestant churches are not considered Catholic? If Catholic, really just means ‘universal’ and not beholden specifically to the Roman Rite, then I’m wondering why Protestants aren’t automatically part of the Catholic Church?

And you think you know all about it when you are sooo misinformed. The 21 Rites in the Catholic Church are STILL very Catholic and believe the same as the others and still under the authority of the same Pope. Universal, in the Catholic understanding, means all Catholics under the authority of the Pope believe the same doctrine, have the same Sacraments universally, (all over the world). It does NOT mean any one, believing anything, is included. Some of the Eastern Churches are in schism. They still believe what we do and have the same Sacraments but they are no longer under the authority of the Pope. Big difference. And yes, the ONE, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is over 2,000 years old. Maybe you should read up on the Early Church Fathers and the Acts of the Apostles. How old is your denomination??? God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

Well I’m not sure how you could be prevented from partaking in communion/eucharist. Christ didn’t say it depended on a piece of paper or membership in a ‘denomination’. If you’re a Christian then you participate in eating the bread/wafer and wine. Whether you believe it is symbolic or transubstantiation… that’s in your own head and beyond the reach of any earthly authority.

Read what St. Paul says about receiving the Body and Blood of Our Lord “unworthily”!!! And while your at it, you might read the 6th Chapter of John too. God Bless, Memaw

 

[PRmerger]

Not sure what you mean by inconsistent? If someone has radically different views then it is better they go there own way.

Well, the actual descriptor is…hypocritical. But I was trying to use a less offensive word.

It’s hypocritical to say, “We got to protest the Church! Its theology was wanting!” but then when her members disagree with her, she says, “You are not permitted to protest!”

That’s…inconsistent. Or hypocritical, if you make me say it.

All over the NT. The letters are to different churches. Even in early Christendom there were different churches with different practices.

No, crai.

There are no examples of folks leaving one church to establish their own church because they disagree with the theology of the preacher.

In fact, here’s an example of what Catholicism tries to do: Priscilla and Aquila (here, they represent the CC), takes the fervent yet theologically-wanting Apollos (here, he represents non-Catholic Christians), aside to give him some correction and catechesis.

usccb.org/bible/acts/18

You have NO EXAMPLES in the NT of Christians forming their own church because they disagreed theologically with their own shepherd.

 

[PRmerger]

You say sanctioning isn’t the modus, and yet you say they are not tolerated… so what happens to them then?

They are told to stop their disobedience.

So as long as the organisation/church/order/group at least pays lip service to the catechism and sends its money to Rome it is not ejected from the CC, is that what you are saying?

Be careful, crai. It is good for you to be here and in dialogue with knowledgeable Catholics, so it would be a shame for you to be banned.

I suggest that you follow in the footsteps of some wonderful non-Catholic posters here, like JonNC, benjohnson, Tomyris, and learn their posting style so you can continue to discourse.

At this point, I don’t see how this differs from fragmentation in the Protestant denominations? Eastern Rite churches don’t even report to the Pope or Vatican

Can you cite the source of your info?

 

[PRmerger]

Pre-marital sex in the OT was NOT license to be promiscuous! It resulted in **automatic **marriage, along with the burdens and obligations of marriage. So yes, God is more concerned with the attitude of heart and behaviour than empty ritual and bits of paper…

Fair enough. You are, at least, consistent.

You will be ok, then, with your daughter living with her boyfriend without the benefit of a “bit of paper?”

 

[lonegreywolf20]

Not really, it will come up again and again in your conscience. You know it’s not right or you wouldn’t be on here trying to convince us it is. Your Lutheran Pastor doesn’t have the final answer, God does. We can talk ourselves into almost anything if we try hard enough, right or wrong!! Prayers and God Bless, Memaw

It is done. I had it done earlier today.

My wife’s health is the only reason why this was done. She cannot get pregnant again as it will put her into a wheelchair for life or worse. That is my reasoning for having got the vasectomy done.

If for whatever reason I am wrong and I end up in he’ll, so be it, at least I can say that I put my wife’s health first and I will be satisfied with that,but I know that I am not condemned, I am saved and that is all that matters.

 

[PRmerger]

It is done. I had it done earlier today.

My wife’s health is the only reason why this was done. She cannot get pregnant again as it will put her into a wheelchair for life or worse. That is my reasoning for having got the vasectomy done.

What will you do if she does get pregnant, wolf? For you do know that vasectomies always allow for error.

If you’re having sex, she may get pregnant. That’s what happens when you have sex. It’s made for babies and for bonding.

If for whatever reason I am wrong and I end up in he’ll, so be it, at least I can say that I put my wife’s health first and I will be satisfied with that,but I know that I am not condemned, I am saved and that is all that matters.

No one knows if he is saved, wolf, until he is dead. Period.

 

[MaryT777]

No your NOT right. You misunderstand what the different Orders really are. And where in the world did you come up with gay nuns for petes sake? Is there no end to things thrown at the Catholic Church either by misunderstandings or at times I think deliberately??? Maybe all Catholics are not faithful to what the Catholic Church teaches, they have a free will, but that doesn’t make them a denomination or it doesn’t make the Catholic Church wrong. Name me one other organization that has lived for over 2,000 years, been thru what the Catholic Church has come thru and still going strong, teaching what Jesus taught, (no caving into Heresy’s or secularism). That should be proof enough that the Catholic Church is protected and guided by the Holy Spirit as Jesus said it would. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Tomdstone]

Name me one other organization that has lived for over 2,000 years, been thru what the Catholic Church has come thru and still going strong, teaching what Jesus taught,

I’ll give you two:
Eastern Orthodox Church
Oriental Orthodox Church

 

[Tomdstone]

We would prevent you by letting you know that non-Catholics cannot join in our communion.

It would be a LIE to receive communion when you are…NOT in communion.

Not true. The Roman Catholic rules allow Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox to receive Holy Communion.

 

[outremer]

Not true. The Roman Catholic rules allow Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox to receive Holy Communion.

Polish National Catholic Church adherents as well.

 

[PRmerger]

Not true. The Roman Catholic rules allow Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox to receive Holy Communion.

That’s because they are in communion with us, Tom. They have a valid priesthood. They confess the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. So when they come forward to receive Him, they profess everything we profess about the Eucharist.

 

[PRmerger]

Polish National Catholic Church adherents as well.

They are Catholic, yes?

 

[Micosil]

They are Catholic, yes?

They’re not in communion with what is known as the Catholic Church, but they have valid sacraments, and canon laws apply to them that members of this church, if properly dispensed and if no minister is available from their church, they may receive the Eucharist (among other sacraments) from Catholic priests.

 

[PRmerger]

Well, wake me up when the Pope states that evangelization equates to bringing lost non-Catholic souls into the confines of the Catholic Church.

Can you acknowledge that it is the DEVIL, and not the Pope, who doesn’t care if we are " Evangelicals or Orthodox, Lutherans, Catholics or Apostolic … he doesn’t care! They are Christians.”

And can you acknowledge that denominational differences are not to be dismissed?

Unless you want to say that worshipping with the Westboro Baptist Church is the same as worshipping with the Greek Orthodox is the same as worshipping with this church:

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=20586&d=1407696715