Why dont you like the church?

[Iamnotafraid]

Your statement reflects a possible reason for leaving the CHRISTIAN faith. The question by the OP seemed to indicate a desire to know why people leave the CATHOLIC faith. Those are two distinct questions.

Didn’t you read what was below ’ boring and long’, I’ll copy and paste it for you…and they are all Catholic beliefs that I rejected.

When I walked away and still believed, the biggest issues were, Mary’s assumption, necessity of confession to a priest, invalidity of marriages, of Catholics, who marry outside of the Church, medals, Saints and the real presence.

 

[TarlsQtr]

Didn’t you read what was below ’ boring and long’, I’ll copy and paste it for you…and they are all Catholic beliefs that I rejected.

When I walked away and still believed, the biggest issues were, Mary’s assumption, necessity of confession to a priest, invalidity of marriages, of Catholics, who marry outside of the Church, medals, Saints and the real presence.

If you can show me where that statement is in the post I quoted, I would be thankful.

In any event, you responded to my post that gave reasons why I believe many leave the Catholic Church (which was the OP’s question). I still do not see why you would respond with a reason to leave the CHRISTIAN Church.

Thank you anyways, though. Many of your reasons for leaving the Catholic Church seem to perfectly illustrate two of the three reasons I cited:

*1. They have no idea what the doctrine is. They were told church “doctrine” by those who have no idea or an axe to grind against the church. I have many protestant friends who tell me all of the time what Catholics believe and are not even in the right ballpark. It goes back to another quote (paraphrase) of the great Archbishop Fulton Sheen: “People do not hate the Catholic Church. They hate what they believe the Catholic Church is. If the Church was what they think it is, I would hate it too.”

1. They know what the doctrine is but have no idea about the philosophy behind it. In other words, they do not see the logic behind it so feel it must not be there.*

 

[East_Anglican]

I am seeing lots of people who dont like the church or converted out of it, so my question is why dont you like the church? Or what teaching dont you like ; that you “feel” there is no basis for?

As for me: I consider myself Catholic, born and raised, but when I started college years ago I took a better look at the church and found many flaws so I just stepped back a bit.

I take it you me The Roman Catolic Church and not The Church as in all Christians Roman Catolic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant and Confused.

Am I right?

 

[kalt]

Sadly I am sure you believe that; its easy for people to tell themselves what is above to avoid a actual intellectual thought.

Sheep being led to the slaughter because of a misguided church.

Scare tactics. Now, even I’M smart enough not to fall for that tired old line.

Can you share with us the exalted “intellectual thought” behind, “Sheep being led to the slaughter because of a misguided church.”, which, BTW, is not a complete thought.

 

[kalt]

Hardly, with all the knowledge in libraries and the Internet it is highly unlikely your observation holds any weight. Your statements makes it easier for people like you to comprehend why someone would leave the church. Calling us all intellectually inept, having too much intellect, or being unable to comprehend is just a tactic. A very lame one.

It’s actually experience that informs us.

How many times have we heard complaints from former Catholics about papal impeccability, Mary worship, praying to statues, and Jesus’ sacrafice not being enough?

It’s very clear that the complaints they have about the CC are rooted in ignorance.

You say you stepped back from the CC. Can you name a fews doctrinal points that you disagree with?

 

[Iamnotafraid]

If you can show me where that statement is in the post I quoted, I would be thankful.

In any event, you responded to my post that gave reasons why I believe many leave the Catholic Church (which was the OP’s question). I still do not see why you would respond with a reason to leave the CHRISTIAN Church.

I haven’t a flippin’ clue what it is your going on about.

 

[Monica4316]

That a Priest, has the power, to summon the Holy Spirit, to turn an ordinary piece of bread, into the very real presence, the literal flesh, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.

I would have to believe that a hunk of bread, is turned into the flesh of the son, of the creator of the universe!

Uhmmmmmm…Nope, that’s not something I could or can believe, unless I suspended all reason, rationality or simply lied to myself.

well this is exactly what the disciples said “how can this man give us His flesh to eat” and left Him… the reason it seems so insane that the Creator of the world would become food for us is because it DOES go beyond rationality. It’s based on love and love isn’t “rational”… love seeks the best of the other…

the Eucharist more than anything shows the immense love that Our Savior has for us. That He would have the love and humility to not only become a human being for us, but to later on become bread… well, to say it correctly: to tranform bread into His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity… everything is made for His glory, yet He hides His glory in the Eucharist for our sake, and that if anything should convince us of His love.

This transformation happens by the Holy Spirit and the priest is just there to say the prayer… and it was Christ who instituted the priesthood for this purpose.

…if the Eucharist did not exist, that would certainly be more rational, but it would not be as loving, and God is love. Because of His nature, He wants to unite Himself with us, and in the Eucharist, gives Himself to us… and we give ourselves to Him. That is a lot like what we were made for and what we’ll experience in Heaven.

Personally…the Eucharist is the reason I can’t leave the Church, no matter how much I might not like about it… the Eucharist, and Mary

Peace

 

[Iamnotafraid]

well this is exactly what the disciples said “how can this man give us His flesh to eat” and left Him… the reason it seems so insane that the Creator of the world would become food for us is because it DOES go beyond rationality. It’s based on love and love isn’t “rational”… love seeks the best of the other…

 

[Oreoracle]

Neither of these are teachings of the Church.

According to the Church, God is infallible, even in ethical matters (that’s another one that’s illogical–objective morality). God says that when people die, they’ll either deserve to be in Heaven, a place of happiness, or Hell, a place of suffering. I can then conclude that God, who Christians deem infallible, believes that certain people deserve happiness and others suffering.

The Church does teach what God says, right?

And Christian ethics is deontological. In case you didn’t know, deontology is the opposite of consequentialism, the philosophy that actually cares about results.

 

[kalt]

According to the Church, God is infallible, even in ethical matters (that’s another one that’s illogical–objective morality). God says that when people die, they’ll either deserve to be in Heaven, a place of happiness, or Hell, a place of suffering. I can then conclude that God, who Christians deem infallible, believes that certain people deserve happiness and others suffering.

The Church does teach what God says, right?

And Christian ethics is deontological. In case you didn’t know, deontology is the opposite of consequentialism, the philosophy that actually cares about results.

My goodness, the victimhood of the guilty.

Actually, God says that we will get even what we don’t deserve - eternal life - if we simply follow him. It’s up to the individual to accept or decline the invitation.

Where in the Catechism does it teach that some people “deserve” eternal life in Heaven?

BTW, I like your name. Got milk?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

There are two general teachings that I strongly dislike:

1. Certain people deserve happiness while others don’t.
2. Principle should reign over results in ethical matters.

(2) is just a flaw in logic. Obviously things are good and bad based on their results, even if you believe the result is to become closer to God. Think about it: would killing still be wrong if it weren’t sin–if it didn’t separate you from God? Christians say all the time that something is wrong because it harms your relationship with God, which is a result.

(1) is far more grave, in my opinion.

1. That is not Catholic dogma, not even close.
2. That doesn’t mean much without an exampl. I will say that since the Church is concerned about eternal results, not temporal results, I would have to disagree with this premise as well.

 

[Bill_Pick]

I am seeing lots of people who dont like the church or converted out of it, so my question is why dont you like the church? Or what teaching dont you like ; that you “feel” there is no basis for?

As for me: I consider myself Catholic, born and raised, but when I started college years ago I took a better look at the church and found many flaws so I just stepped back a bit.

What church are you talking about or you talking about the cathloic Church and what flaws did you find.

 

[Bill_Pick]

There are two general teachings that I strongly dislike:

1. Certain people deserve happiness while others don’t.
2. Principle should reign over results in ethical matters.

(2) is just a flaw in logic. Obviously things are good and bad based on their results, even if you believe the result is to become closer to God. Think about it: would killing still be wrong if it weren’t sin–if it didn’t separate you from God? Christians say all the time that something is wrong because it harms your relationship with God, which is a result.

(1) is far more grave, in my opinion.

Certain people deserve happiness while others don’t. Are you trying to say this is a Cathloic teaching

 

[survive]

Do you honestly believe that this God would create a means of salvation upon a primitive notion of a blood sacrifice, exclusively create one means in which to save, that which he created and then assure, that only one institution possesses the power to actually carry out his grand miracle, of turning a hunk of bread, into his human flesh? ( only it’s still looks like bread, but it really is the flesh of the creator of the universe)

Yes. I see absolutely no reason not to think so. A God big enough and deep enough to create the universe we have would take no interest in proving His sophistication and modern style by “updating” His “primitive” ways. It’s the little thinking that tells human beings to try to act more modern than the neighbors.
One means to save? Only one? He owes us three or five or twenty-nine or ten billion or however many? He doesn’t owe us the one. It’s simply absurd to deny a means of salvation on the basis of number. Same for one institution. Why is the turning of bread to flesh hard to accept? I’ve seen a lot, and my idea of what is possible has stretched many times in response to real life.

Do you honestly believe that? Can you sincerely tell a co-worker that on the weekend, you ingested the flesh of the son, of the creator of the universe?

Have you ever been to Mass? Do you honestly think people believe this stuff?

Yes, yes, yes, and another yes.

These people are supposed to be consuming the flesh of the son of God, the creator of the universe. I look around, I see boredom, I don’t see people in ecstatic anticipation of being able to eat the muscle fibers of God, of the omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent creator…

If this were all true, Catholics should be bragging about how many times they’ve consumed the flesh of the son of God, the creator of the universe…they don’t…and I know why.

I go to Mass, I see ecstatic anticipation, sleepiness, human attention-span limitations, excitement, and awe and reverence mingled joyfully in a roomful of people of all ages, backgrounds, thinking styles, education levels, origins of family and every demographic factor. I see people tremble in line. I know why. I feel the excitement too. It’s a major, probably main, reason I’m Catholic. May it last for ever.

Fortunately, I’ve been warned by other free thinkers and if I provide the reason, it will get me penalized or banned.

It’s so sad the the censorship is so strong around here, that I am forced to hold back.

It doesn’t involve a shipwreck on the Andorran shores, by any chance, does it?

**Give me a break! **

I simply do not believe that. An omnipotent God, allowing a piece of bread, to turn into the human flesh of ’ himself’, is simply a human blood sacrifice…and a very odd action, for the creator of the universe.

Why? Of course it’s a blood sacrifice. His omnipotence doesn’t decrease the likelihood of a given miracle, it increases it. Miracles are less odd for the Creator of the universe than for the rest of us. And there are miracles. My life has been a series of them. What would stop the Inventor of bread and of flesh from making one into the other? He designed and made them both in the first place.

 

[Iamnotafraid]

Yes. I see absolutely no reason not to think so.

There is no evidence what-so-ever and that is why you need faith to believe.

I go to Mass, I see ecstatic anticipation, sleepiness, human attention-span limitations, excitement, and awe and reverence mingled joyfully in a roomful of people of all ages, backgrounds, thinking styles, education levels, origins of family and every demographic factor. I see people tremble in line. I know why. I feel the excitement too. It’s a major, probably main, reason I’m Catholic. May it last for ever.

This is where I disagree. If the flesh, of the son of the creator of the universe, really were present in a room, people would be losing their minds. This doesn’t just happen once every thousand years, nooooooooooooo, the flesh of the son of God appears daily, hundreds, if not thousands of times a day.

Funny, watching Catholics, you’d never know that the only regular supernatural event that takes place daily, is actually going on.

 

[emeraldcoast]

Didn’t you read what was below ’ boring and long’, I’ll copy and paste it for you…and they are all Catholic beliefs that I rejected.

When I walked away and still believed, the biggest issues were, Mary’s assumption, necessity of confession to a priest, invalidity of marriages, of Catholics, who marry outside of the Church, medals, Saints and the real presence.

I think that the misunderstanding is coming from your religion stating that you are an unbeliever. I assume that when you left the Catholic Church you were still a believer that Christ was your Savior. Did you attend another Christian Church after you left the Catholic Church? I am sure that you know that not all Christian Churches teach those things that you posted. I guess, I am just wondering what made you throw the baby out with the bathwater if you have left Christianity?

God Bless!

 

[survive]

This is where I disagree. If the flesh, of the son of the creator of the universe, really were present in a room, people would be losing their minds. This doesn’t just happen once every thousand years, nooooooooooooo, the flesh of the son of God appears daily, hundreds, if not thousands of times a day.

Funny, watching Catholics, you’d never know that the only regular supernatural event that takes place daily, is actually going on.

The fact that it takes place daily is exactly why the type of excitement changes from the early overwhelmingness to the sweet quiet awe that people who knowingly experience the supernatural regularly grow into.

 

[abirdrrl]

I first started slowly ending my faith in Catholicism when I came to the realization that the eucharist is not the physical body and blood of Christ.

For the most part though, I like the Church, and in the present times I think it’s a source of great good in the world. However, I don’t believe in many of its teachings, and no longer consider myself a member (I am a Baha’i now).

 

[emeraldcoast]

I first started slowly ending my faith in Catholicism when I came to the realization that the eucharist is not the physical body and blood of Christ.

For the most part though, I like the Church, and in the present times I think it’s a source of great good in the world. However, I don’t believe in many of its teachings, and no longer consider myself a member (I am a Baha’i now).

Not all Christian Churches teach the real presence in the Eucharist. You did not leave the Christian faith over this issue, did you?

Not a member is one thing…Not a follower of Jesus Christ is something else…

God Bless!

 

[abirdrrl]

Not all Christian Churches teach the real presence in the Eucharist. You did not leave the Christian faith over this issue, did you?

God Bless!

The Orthodox faith also professes the real presence. Protestantism didn’t carry enough historical validity for me (contradictions with ECFs, God leaving His people without truth until Luther/Calvin and the gang showed up, and lack of unity among Protestants).