I think it would be really hard to have the same level of affection for someone who denied Christ than it would for someone who served Christ all their live. But you have to keep in mind, ja4, we do not consider them “deceased” like you do. We know that those who have hidden their lives in Christ live forever more.
**
The official teaching of the Church has never considered beliefs about Mary to be in any way equal in importance to truths about God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit. Vatican Council II expressed it best when the
Did you see the religion study in today's papers (Feb. 26)? Ten per cent of the US population is ex-Catholic. The only reason Catholicism is maintaining its share of the population (24%) is because of the influx of Latinos into the US, most of them illegals.
The Church needs to become a 'bigger tent' and permit diversity of opinion on such issues as Mary or it will drive out more and more people who simply can't accept doctrines that they find out of line with progress in education, science, and common sense. The doctrines of Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are two examples of a medieval mindset that individual Catholics should be permitted to avoid. What a relief it would be for millions of Catholics to exercise more individual freedom of thought.Isn’t it enough that God give us a free will to follow Him with His Truth?
The Church is not a democracy, and neither is the Faith. If some of the faithful wish to leave because they do not agree with the fullness of the Faith, that is up to them. Most people leave the Church because either they were poorly taught their Faith adequately or they are engaged in some sort of behavior that the Church does not accept. Either way, it is my opinion that Christ is not interested for millions of Catholics to think whatever they wish when it comes to their Faith. Christ founded a Church; the Church is here to safeguard, protect, and preserve the Faith by the Holy Spirit. He left the office of Peter and whoever exercises that authority does so as His prime minister here on earth, in keeping with the Davidic Kingdom upon which the Church was founded.
You’re not the first man to encourage the Church to conform better to the world’s ideas of “reasonable,” and to reject what seems “untenable.” One of the very first was an eminently reasonable bishop named Arius. “[V]ersed in history, literature, psychology, etc.” as you are, you’ll have no difficulty reading up on your predecessor and learning something about the trenchant counterarguments of St. Athanasius–of course, the latter wasn’t widely taken seriously by sophisticated men of his day, so perhaps he’ll fare no better with you. Let us know.
Now, as to Athanasias and Arius: the early church should have let them carry on their interesting debate and learned from them both. What troubles me is this notion that we all have to conform to the same interpretations of scripture or whatever. The idea that heretics are somehow evil and must be eliminated (and often burned to death) offends the modern mind, which understands the right as well as the value of open and honest discussion of various viewpoints.
Sadly, Roman Catholicism and most evangelical Protestants are sure that they have the full truth and that everyone who disagrees is wrong and in danger of eternal damnation. How often the church was wrong years ago.
Consider its condemnation of Galileo as one small example. It even taught that man had one less rib than woman during Medieval times. Not long ago it pushed limbo to one side, and how many saints were removed from the official calendar way back in the 70s - or perhaps well before that. My memory is cluttered.
I recall doing research on St. Thomas Aquinas in college and having to get special permission to read certain basic historical books that the church then condemned. And St. Thomas, by the way, wrote that heretics could kill souls, worse than killing bodies, and they should be delivered to civil authorities to be executed. Certainly the Church doesn't preach that today!There already are millions of Catholics who exercise more individual freedom of thought; But they’re called Orthdox, Lutherans, Anglicans and Protestants.
True, and Thomas was correct in stating that heretics could cause souls to embrace falsehoods. As for delivering them up to civil authorities, only Communists do that now.
Hello Roy5,
Here is the Genealogy of the Roman Catholic ChurchHello Roy5,
I see two major problems with your thoughts here and this is yet another example of the error, which is “Protestantism”.
As far as the “big tent” comment, most Protestant Non-Catholic Christian religions are uniquely “English” (from England) “American” and “democratic” (small “d”) in nature, and come from a “modern”, less than 500 years ago, perspective. This “modern” perspective is the lens in which, “modern” non-Catholic Christian theology is viewed. It is here that the confusion that is “Protestantism”, begins.
- The truth never changes.
- Christianity was never intended to be a religion of “God on your terms”.
The “truth” transcends” and so does the “Catholic model”, which is the truth.
Note: A vast majority of Protestant Non-Catholic Christian religions were started in America less than two hundred years ago.
Go here and see the Genealogy of Christian Faith Communities. This list does not include the many thousands of non-Catholic Christian religions, which exist today.
Just because something is repeated over and over, does’nt make it true.
One problem that I see.
Hello Namesake,
Well Jimmy, I’m still here. Looking around for what I need.Hello Namesake,
Thank you for your kind comments, a couple posts ago.
Namesake, I didn’t know the you spoke ‘Catholic”.:doh2:
“Apostasy” is a Catholic term which is used to describe those who leave Catholicism.
You keep taking “Catholic “ and before you know it, you’ll be Catholic. :hug3: :extrahappy: