Why I'm Still Not Catholic

[The_Iambic_Pen]

Continued from previous post…
"gardenswithkids:

Quick answer, you are correct.
Here’s an old “Ask the Apoligist” thread with a catechism reference. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthrea…ht=apparitions

Thanks!

berniedehler:

To be Catholic, you’ll have to stop reading the Bible so you no longer see the contradictions with the Bible and the Catholic catechsim… just my opinion.

Yes, well, I haven’t found that to be the case so far. Just today I was reading Ephesians chapter 4, which speaks of unity in the body.

Ephesians 4:4-6 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all. (RSV:CE)

Just out of curiosity, why do we always see manifestos of why people are not Catholics?

See gardenswithkids’ explanation in post 94.

Regarding point #7 again, I do think you can safely put that objection to rest. I think that may be some people’s opinion, but I really don’t think it’s actual Church teachings.

Very good. I’m not saying it is official Church teaching. It is, however, an attitude held by some. Catholics are very blessed, but they should not be arrogant.

Unless you have more proof that the Church teaches this beyond some people’s opinion, I hope #7 doesn’t keep you out of the Catholic Church.

Oh, it won’t. It’s not really an issue. I only brought it up out of frustration with the whole Catholic-Orthodox debate I’ve been dealing with for the past year or so. Sometimes I long for simpler times, though I know I can’t go back now.

If you wait until you’re totally satisfied with the Church, you will never join. The Church is the incarnation of Christ in the world – a human world, subject to human weaknesses.

Well, a thousand difficulties do not add up to a single doubt, as someone once said. If I can be convinced of the authority of the Catholic Church (and, in particular, the authority of the pope), then I can accept the rest on faith until I figure it out.

Hellooo…Pen.

My prayers are with you:thumbsup:

Thanks!
Janet S:

I have another suggestion for you, but this is an exercise for your heart, not your mind. If you haven’t done this already, you should make a pilgrimage to Rome. While you are there, go to St Peter’s Square on Wednesday for a papal audience. I did this, and now I know what is meant by the universal Church. When you go there, you can see these words from (Rev 5:9-10) come to life: “Worthy are you to receive the scroll and to break open its seals, for you were slain and with your blood you purchased for God those from every tribe and tongue, people and nation. You made them a kingdom and priests for our God, and they will reign on earth.” (Rev 5:9-10)

Yes, I would like to do that someday. Unfortunately, I’ll have to settle for the rivers of Babylon for the time being (that is, of course, a secret code telling you I’m headed back to Iraq soon; shhhh!).

Once again, thanks to all of you for your support, questions and answers. I truly do want to be Catholic, as I have said. More importantly, though, I want the truth. Hopefully, those two goals are one and the same.

God bless!

 

[wanner47]

Iambic -

Prayers for your safety while you’re in Iraq, and also prayers for you as you continue on your spiritual journey.

 

[Church_Militant]

Hang in there IP and I will pray for your safety.
May the Lord detail special angels to watch over you.
Pax tecum,

 

[fineca]

I’m back again! Mass was wonderful today. I had forgotten how much I love it. The Divine Liturgy is beautiful, but the Catholic Mass can be just as beautiful if there is a reverent attitude. Just for fun, here’s a link to a video of the Cathedral, where I attend. I filmed it this afternoon.

Looks great for someone whose cathedral is smaller than an average Catholic parish in any country with more than a 0,15% Catholic population

I’ll only be addressing the points you made to my replies…

Point taken.

Thanks

True, if the Pope has the primacy.

But you just said the Orthodox do admit the Pope had/has the primacy! They just don’t accept all the claims of the Pope, but why not, since it’s he who has the primacy?

That could happen, but we need not rely on private interpretation. We could look at what the Councils have said.

Yes but the councils have indicated the Pope has a primacy. Now are we going to privately interpret what that primacy means or ask the one who has the primacy?

If your statement is an accurate portrayal of Catholic teaching, I see nothing objectionable about it. We really don’t know what happens to the unbaptized, after all.

Exactly, that’s my point, and we agree, and there’s no problem.

But his belief in their culpability did not automatically make it so, I trust?

No, that’s the point! He wasn’t infallible in his private thoughts that were conditioned by that time&place and were underlying the definition, and those have changed and thus formed our understanding of the truth.

After all, there could be any number of factors which would make a heretic/pagan/Jew not accept the Catholic Church. I don’t know if any person is fully culpable. I think it’s safe to say that all of our decisions are influenced (though not completely determined, of course) by external factors.

See, you’re coming closer now to how the Church has come to think. Thanks to modern psychology, philosophy, geography etc, we can start with the assumption of non-culpability, while back in the Middle Ages they started with the assumption of culpability. That is the big change, but that was never a defined question of faith&morals.

Hmmhh…perhaps the Orthodox have minimized some of these teachings in recent years, out of an effort to be more ecumenical. I would be interested to know what the monks on Mount Athos have to say about “Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus” from the Orthodox point of view (of course, you’d have to say it in Greek…).

It’s ecclesiam, accusative with extra But you know there are also Old Orthodox believers who believe that the apostolic succession was lost some centuries ago in some Orthodox reforms so they don’t have the priesthood or the Eucharist but they do have prayer meetings etc. and they believe nobody is saved outside of their community, I think. And some Orthodox I know have said there’s no salvation outside the Orthodox Church but some that God may save others too, and some have said you’d go to hell if you converted Catholic, others that it’s not like that. So no less confusion there than here.

Hmmhh…I hope this is the case. This coming to a greater understanding of doctrines issue does concern me slightly. How much of what the Church believes now may someday be “more greatly understood?”

I don’t know how much, but there can certainly still be development. For example Mary’s heavenly queenship or mediatorship has never been infallibly defined but it’s still “there”, so the Pope might define it and thus there’d be a development one could call a deepening of understanding etc…needless to say, one can’t base one’s decision of conversion or non-conversion on such speculation.

Yes, I think that’s a fair way of looking at it.

Thanks We’re seeing some progress here

God bless,
E

 

[fineca]

Oh, I didn’t notice the Iraq thing until now! My father is from Iraq and my aunt&grandmother live there so the whole thing is close2my heart…I so don’t get Bush and his “we made a mistake with Iraq, so let’s send thousands of more there” - the whole thing is a mess and I suffer both for the American soldiers and the Iraqis amidst the chaos… I hope God will do something about all of that SOON - so oremus!

 

[RNRobert]

Yes, they are schooled as hard as the pope! The current ecumenical patriarch attended several Catholic colleges in Rome, Catholic University, and Athens University. He speaks fluant Greek, German, Arabic, Italian, and Russian. The patriarches write many books, but they are uncommon here in the west. The patriarches are a great deal more reserved than the pope. As a matter of fact, the last ecumenical patriarch, His Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras, had a funeral that was remeniscent of a lowly monk…

I do not doubt that the patriarchs are learned and holy men. My point is, they do not speak out on issues of faith and morals like the Pope has done. The Papacy gives Christianity a voice in the world that neither Protestantism nor Orthodoxy has.

 

[wcknight]

I agree with 7 and I’ve been Catholic all my life. The teaching used to be that all non-Catholics were toast. I couldn’t really believe that my Baptist Bible loving friends were eternally doomed just because they went to a church 2 blocks away.

But as far as your other problems with the Church, I would point you in the direction of various saints of the RCC who intimately knew the will of God. IF any of them had a huge problem with the the papalcy, they would have certainly spoken out about it. But the fact is that all were obedient to the bishop or Rome.

I’ve been reading a book about St. Gerald Majella, an extraordinary saint (it is said he never commited even a venial sin - and an extemely prolific miracle worker) who at a very early age, is known to have played and conversed with the Christ child animated on many occasion. He lived as much in touch with God as anybody. He joined the Redemptorist as a brother and never once did he criticize the Church nor did he ever denounce it for anything. He knew the Church was and is what it claimed to be.

The point is, that those closest to God, His holiest saints all knew the Truth and that Truth resides in the Catholic Church. All these people who were very obviously led by the Holy Spirit affirm the authenticity of the Catholic Church. Not one ever said the Orthodox Church or any other church was more legitimate.

 

[Janet_S]

I do not doubt that the patriarchs are learned and holy men. My point is, they do not speak out on issues of faith and morals like the Pope has done. The Papacy gives Christianity a voice in the world that neither Protestantism nor Orthodoxy has.

Regarding moral issues, I have heard before that the Orthodox Churches allow divorce and remarriage a certain number of times (I think it is 3 times). I also heard that they support legalized abortion. I am not sure if this is true, so if anyone knows about this, please comment.

Also, is there an official Orthodox position on the issues of artificial birth control, abortion, embryonic stem cell research, same-sex marriage, extra-marital sexual activity, cloning, and euthanasia?

The Catholic Church is clear on what it teaches about these issues and has always been opposed to them. (BTW, all Christian churches before the 1930’s opposed artificial birth control and saw it as intrinsicially evil.) The Catholic Church recognizes that all these issues are related, and Pope John Paul II called our current culture “The Culture of Death” because of the widespread growing acceptance of these practices.

Here are some encyclicals about the above moral issues:

CASTI CONNUBII

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii_en.html

HUMANAE VITAE

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

Evangelium vitae

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html

 

[Contarini]

Regarding moral issues, I have heard before that the Orthodox Churches allow divorce and remarriage a certain number of times (I think it is 3 times).

My understanding is that the Orthodox allow remarriage of divorced persons out of what they call “economia.” In other words, the Orthodox believe that sometimes exceptions need to be made for the sake of human weakness. The principle that marriage is indissoluble remains, but the Church accepts that in fact this particular marriage has broken down, and so it allows another marriage in order to prevent worse sin. The remarriage ceremony, however, is very different from the normal marriage ceremony and is primarily penitential. As far as I’m concerned, this is just as valid as the contemporary Catholic approach (define the conditions for a valid marriage so strictly that most marriages are probably not valid, but apply those strict criteria only retrospectively when the marriage has already broken down, so as to allow for an annulment), if not more so. It’s more honest and straightforward and it amounts to much the same thing in the end.

I also heard that they support legalized abortion. I am not sure if this is true, so if anyone knows about this, please comment.

They do not, but on the parish level I think the teaching is less uniform than in Catholicism, and as in Catholicism there’s a huge problem with Orthodox politicians who are pro-choice. On the whole the Orthodox Church does not do as much to discipline or at least reprove such politicians as the Catholic Church does.

I once overheard a colleague in grad school (who had converted from Catholicism to Orthodoxy along with her Methodist fiance) telling someone else that her marriage counselling in the local Greek Orthodox parish used a Catholic book but “skipped the chapter on abortion.” On the other hand, I happen to know that this same couple later got fed up with the Orthodox Church (particularly what they perceived as its attitude to women) and the last I heard they were actually attending a Catholic student center at the university where they teach. . . .

I think the best way to sum it up is that the Orthodox official position is no different from the Catholic one, but that politically and socially the Orthodox don’t take as strong a stand or enforce it as well.

Also, is there an official Orthodox position on the issues of artificial birth control,

Again, the official position has not been changed from the traditional one, but acceptance of ABC is far more common than acceptance of abortion (I wouldn’t be surprised if in fact the reason the Greek priest skipped the “chapter on abortion” had more to do with ABC than with abortion per se). I know of no respected Orthodox writer and certainly no bishop who supports abortion in any way, but Bishop Kallistos Ware, one of the most popular Orthodox writers, has come to believe that ABC may be allowable, and he sees this as a growing trend within Orthodoxy. More traditional Orthodox, however, would reject this.

embryonic stem cell research,

I don’t know the Orthodox position, but I suspect it’s similar that of Catholicism, insofar as there is an official position.

same-sex marriage,

I don’t think it’s any different from Catholicism.

extra-marital sexual activity,

Definitely condemned!

cloning, and euthanasia?

I believe they are opposed, though again I don’t know the positions in detail.

Two things to bear in mind:

1. The Orthodox Church traditionally has been less likely to take political stands than the Catholic Church. Most of the differences on the issues you have raised would pertain to this rather than to doctrine per se.
2. While the different Orthodox jurisdictions do not differ in their dogmatic/doctrinal teaching, they do vary somewhat in emphasis and application. On the whole, the more “ethnic” jurisdictions in the U.S. (such as the Greeks), while traditional in their doctrine, are less likely to take stands or be actively involved in prolife and similar activities. The Orthodox Church in America, on the other hand, takes stands that are very similar to those of the Catholic Church. (My colleague mentioned above spoke in the same conversation of her plans to join the OCA when opportunity presented itself, because the OCA was “more liberal” than the Greeks–I have since come to believe that she was seriously mistaken in this respect, and I suspect that the disillusionment her husband expressed to me in the last couple conversations I’ve had with him may have arisen from the discovery that this was the case.) I believe the Antiochians do as well. Both the OCA and the Antiochians have had a lot of Protestant evangelical converts (in the case of the Antiochians an entire small Protestant denomination converted to Orthodoxy and its clergy became Antiochian priests), and this has affected their ethos IMHO.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Mickey]

The Orthodox have been in separation from the papacy for twice as long as Anglicans, and yet they haven’t fallen into any significant heresies.

It may have something to do with retaining Apostolic Succession.

 

[Mickey]

but I found that I could not choose between Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

Greetings Iambic,

I understand and sympathize with your dilemma. As an Eastern Catholic, the Great Schism between East and West tears at my very soul. As a “Uniate”, many Latin Catholics do not understand me (or know that I exist) and many Orthodox do not like me because I am a “traitor”.

When all is said and done, it comes down to love. I am Catholic **and **Orthodox in my heart. I strive to love all people of all backgrounds. At times, I have been drawn to become Orthodox, but that would require the renunciation of Rome–and I cannot do that. Something deep inside tells me that I must not separate from the Bishop of Rome.

The only advice I can give you is: Find a Church with valid sacraments and Apostolic Succession (Catholic or Orthodox). Pray often and worship the Trinity ( Liturgically and privately)–and let love always be your guide.

Peace and blessings to you,
Mickey

 

[Contarini]

It may have something to do with retaining Apostolic Succession.

Indeed, this fact is a strong argument against the validity of Anglican Orders!

However, the original claim was that centralized papal authority, rather than Apostolic Succession, was necessary to preserve a church from the possibility of falling into heresy.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

"wanner47:

Prayers for your safety while you’re in Iraq, and also prayers for you as you continue on your spiritual journey.

Thanks!

Hang in there IP and I will pray for your safety.
May the Lord detail special angels to watch over you.
Pax tecum,

And thanks to you as well!

But you just said the Orthodox do admit the Pope had/has the primacy! They just don’t accept all the claims of the Pope, but why not, since it’s he who has the primacy?

Yeah, I should have clarified that. Does the pope have primacy because the Church as a whole has given his office a position of honor? I don’t think the Orthodox would argue about this. The other question, though, is does have the pope have primacy because God wanted him to have it? That is not so clear to me. However, my problem is not so much with whether or not the pope has primacy. I’m more concerned with the supremacy issue. And, in my opinion, just because the pope has primacy, it does not automatically mean he is the one most qualified to know what the primacy means. It could even be the case that the pope would be prejudiced in favor of his own power and would increase this power over time, at every opportunity.

Yes but the councils have indicated the Pope has a primacy. Now are we going to privately interpret what that primacy means or ask the one who has the primacy?

They have indicated, yes. However, I’m not certain any pre-Schism council came out and definined papal primacy in the same way the popes themselves seemed to understand it.

No, that’s the point! He wasn’t infallible in his private thoughts that were conditioned by that time&place and were underlying the definition, and those have changed and thus formed our understanding of the truth.

So infallibility only covers the words actually said and not the meanings behind them?

It’s ecclesiam, accusative with extra: D

Thanks for the correction.

I don’t know how much, but there can certainly still be development. For example Mary’s heavenly queenship or mediatorship has never been infallibly defined but it’s still “there”, so the Pope might define it and thus there’d be a development one could call a deepening of understanding etc…needless to say, one can’t base one’s decision of conversion or non-conversion on such speculation.

Development just concerns me, especially since every post-Schism doctrinal definition drives the Catholic and Orthodox Churches further apart.

Oh, I didn’t notice the Iraq thing until now! My father is from Iraq and my aunt&grandmother live there so the whole thing is close2my heart…I so don’t get Bush and his “we made a mistake with Iraq, so let’s send thousands of more there” - the whole thing is a mess and I suffer both for the American soldiers and the Iraqis amidst the chaos… I hope God will do something about all of that SOON - so oremus!

Yes, it is indeed a mess. We should all keep those in the region in our prayers.

But as far as your other problems with the Church, I would point you in the direction of various saints of the RCC who intimately knew the will of God. IF any of them had a huge problem with the the papalcy, they would have certainly spoken out about it. But the fact is that all were obedient to the bishop or Rome.

Good point, yes.

I’ve been reading a book about St. Gerald Majella, an extraordinary saint (it is said he never commited even a venial sin - and an extemely prolific miracle worker) who at a very early age, is known to have played and conversed with the Christ child animated on many occasion. He lived as much in touch with God as anybody. He joined the Redemptorist as a brother and never once did he criticize the Church nor did he ever denounce it for anything. He knew the Church was and is what it claimed to be.

Maybe I still have some Protestant prejudices, but I have to admit I am always skeptical of stories like this. A man who never sinned and played with Christ in the form of a child? It just seems “odd,” for lack of a better word.

I understand and sympathize with your dilemma. As an Eastern Catholic, the Great Schism between East and West tears at my very soul. As a “Uniate”, many Latin Catholics do not understand me (or know that I exist) and many Orthodox do not like me because I am a “traitor”.

It is a difficult position in which to be. I shall be praying for you and for all the Eastern Catholics.

The only advice I can give you is: Find a Church with valid sacraments and Apostolic Succession (Catholic or Orthodox). Pray often and worship the Trinity ( Liturgically and privately)–and let love always be your guide.

Sounds good.

Peace and blessings to you,
Mickey

And to you!

God bless!

 

[Janet_S]

My understanding is that the Orthodox allow remarriage of divorced persons out of what they call “economia.” In other words, the Orthodox believe that sometimes exceptions need to be made for the sake of human weakness. The principle that marriage is indissoluble remains, but the Church accepts that in fact this particular marriage has broken down, and so it allows another marriage in order to prevent worse sin. The remarriage ceremony, however, is very different from the normal marriage ceremony and is primarily penitential. As far as I’m concerned, this is just as valid as the contemporary Catholic approach (define the conditions for a valid marriage so strictly that most marriages are probably not valid, but apply those strict criteria only retrospectively when the marriage has already broken down, so as to allow for an annulment), if not more so. It’s more honest and straightforward and it amounts to much the same thing in the end.

Thanks, Contarini, for your response about the official Orthodox position on these moral issues.

This is off the topic, but I have a comment about the Catholic annulment process. In many ways it does seem like the Catholic Church has “caved in” on the issue of divorce and remarriage. In my parents day, divorce was rare, and the most common way for a divorced and remarried person to return to full communion with the Catholic Church was for them to agree to live together like “brother and sister” (no sexual activity allowed). There may have been annulments in the last few generations, but they were certainly not common like they are today.

In today’s culture divorce is so common (around 50% of married couples divorce), so I can understand why the Church does allow for these annulments, even though the reasons can often seem like a “technicality.” Should a bad marriage be the only unforgivable sin? I choose to trust the Church on this one. She is certainly wiser and more experienced than I am.

I do, though, view the annulment process–required by the Catholic Church–to be an opportunity for learning and growth for the persons involved. You state that the Orthodox approach, not requiring an annulment, is “more honest and straightforward and it amounts to much the same thing in the end.” But at least the Catholic Church requires people to formally reflect on what a marriage is and what went wrong. Also, I know of many Catholics who have gone through one annulment process, but I don’t know of any who have been given a second one. So, I think maybe it is good thing for the Church to require people to go through the annulment process if this limits repeated divorces and remarriages.

Annulments are probably a lot like the sacrament of Confession–difficult to go through at the time, but in the end are the best medicine to lead us on the path to holiness and to proper Christian living.

 

[Joseph_Smith]

Well i am still not a catholic! Why you may ask? Well you claim that the authority of Peter is with the pope. Peter had great authority he even healed people. In the prodestant churchs i see people getting healed all the time. But I do not recall ever seeing the pope heal a single person. As a matter of fact i have never heard of a catholic telling of a bishop or a priest ever healing them either. So why would i want to follow the teaching of a powerless church. You know there is a scripture that actually tell us that in the ladder times there shall arose a form of men who will look holy and who will come into the church who are inwardly are wolfs and lact the power of God. So if there is not power is God working with in that church.
The word also tells us that the tradation make the power of God to no effect. And you church i say has more traditions then all other forms of churchs that exist today. So so many and they are not supported in the scripture. Thus no power.
Frankly i need Gods power working in my life. I want his help in every area of my life.
Also i do not find a priesthood like the catholic priesthood supported in the bible. And actually there can exist no priesthood on this earth today like the levetical priesthood because Jesus did away with it by becomeing the one high priest for all time. So we go to Jesus in prayer. And we need no other people to Go into the holiness of God today. Our seperation is over if you are born again.
I find it interesting how error has creaped into the catholic church in these times. It is actually mind numbing when you look at all the mis-information that the people of the catholic church are promoting as the gosple.
Jesus has come to restore you to God, he came to remove the seperation between you and God. He came to show you the desire God has for a personnel relationship. He died that you could live in and to God. He did all this so you could become more then you are and could lie as christ in the fullness of his ministry tot he world. He made you priest and kings before God and gave you each the authority of Christ in your lives. You will notice i keep refering to Christ. Our hope is in Christ and out lives are his to use as he wills. Some are called to be great men and woman of God. Your church teaches directly against the desire of God to make each and every one of you a light unto the world and a voice for God in this hour. The whole promise of aberham is promised to each person who is born again. And it is a spiritual birth. You are not saved by the priest proforming a act over you nor is a child. Salvation works the same way it did from the beginning. It is a free will act in which The holy spirit calls unto you and you repent and recieve the spirit of Jesus. Thus you are born again. People get saved in bars in toilets in jails. Are ther priest in those places. Yes there is a priest there his name is Jesus. Jesus came from the sinners. Jesus is still coming for the Sinners. Jesus heals he is still healing. The ministers of Christ are shephards first and formost. I do not find your priest to be shepherds. Jesus Chruch is a church of no seperation from the clurgy and the people. I do not find that in your church. So is your church for me. No i need Jesus. All i need is Jesus. Give me Jesus. I do not see any men in your church preaching Jesus, I do not hear about the blood in your church of the finished work of the cross.
The bible tells us that Jesus died one and entered into the holiest of all once with his own blood and presented it once unto the father for the sins of the whole world. You church teaches that he does it ever time you take communion. In fact you teach he is put to the cross anew each time you take the communion. That is directly against he word of GOD. Jesus suffered the cross one time for all sin and he is not put to the cross anew.
I do not follow error i follow the Lord and his word.

 

[wanner47]

 I do not follow error i follow the Lord and his word.

Maybe you could try following some rules of grammar and punctuation, too. It would be so much easier to respond to your post and engage in meaningful debate if I could read your posts without getting a headache.

 

[Church_Militant]

Maybe you could try following some rules of grammar and punctuation, too. It would be so much easier to respond to your post and engage in meaningful debate if I could read your posts without getting a headache.

No Kidding!

 

[Thepeug]

Iambic,

As an eastern Catholic who was torn between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, I sympathize with your struggle. My ultimate decision for Catholicism, however, requires a rather lengthy explanation. Please PM me if your are interested, and be assured of my prayers.

God bless,

Chris

 

[Rye-Guy]

Peter had great authority he even healed people. In the prodestant churchs i see people getting healed all the time. But I do not recall ever seeing the pope heal a single person. As a matter of fact i have never heard of a catholic telling of a bishop or a priest ever healing them either. So why would i want to follow the teaching of a powerless church.

Have you ever heard of an exorcism? I can’t think of anything more healing than that. Miracles within the Church happen everyday.

The word also tells us that the tradation make the power of God to no effect. And you church i say has more traditions then all other forms of churchs that exist today. So so many and they are not supported in the scripture. Thus no power.
Frankly i need Gods power working in my life. I want his help in every area of my life.

Once again, evidence please! All of the sacraments within the Church are supported within the Bible. This link shoulc help to explain: catholic.com/library/sacraments.asp

Also i do not find a priesthood like the catholic priesthood supported in the bible. And actually there can exist no priesthood on this earth today like the levetical priesthood because Jesus did away with it by becomeing the one high priest for all time. So we go to Jesus in prayer. And we need no other people to Go into the holiness of God today. Our seperation is over if you are born again.

Support is throughout the Bible: Acts 13:2-3, Acts 14:22, 1 Tim. 4:14, Acts 20:28, and so on… And as for celibacy: Cor. 7:7-8, 1 Cor. 7:25-28 in which St. Paul speaks of his choice to lead a life of celibacy. Moreover, the parctice has been a part of Christian tradition since the establishment of the Church.

 

[Janet_S]

To Joseph Smith,

It sounds like you are a long way from being a Catholic. But who knows, maybe some day you will be one.

Right now it is obvious you know nothing about the Catholic Church. I would oppose the CC too if it were anything like you portray it to be. It is obvious, though,. that your information about the CC comes from biased, anti-Catholic sources–most likely Jack Chick, Dave Hunt, William Webster, Loraine Boettner.

I think once you learn 1) what the CC really teaches, 2) how the Bible actually supports our beliefs, and 3) that the earliest Christians were Catholic, not Protestant, you may very well decide to become a Catholic.

The fact that you are here on this website shows that you have some interest in the CC. I have hope that you will not remain with your erroneous beliefs.