O
omgriley
Guest
Because he isn’t interested in coming back. He’s interested in taking cheap shots because he’s uncomfortable with the claims of the Church.
- Status
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I appreciate that if one wants to have “constructive dialogue” or any type of fellowship, ecumenism, etc, one should start off by not being a jerk.
However, it is important that Catholics also not fall into the trap of thinking, “hey, if we all love and follow Jesus, then one church is as good as another” or “hey, Catholics have their truth and Protestants also have their truth, maybe we should appreciate the other guy’s truth” etc.
The whole reason why previous Popes back in the 19th century and early 20th century did not promote ecumenism of any sort, and told us to burn Protestant Bibles and such, and put up many obstacles to Catholics marrying Protestants, is they did not want Catholics to be misled in this way, and led away from the Church. Now I know nobody likes to be told they are wrong, but the fact that I see good things in many Protestant people, and even see some good features in, say, Protestant church services (for example, better music and better preaching) that Catholics would do well to emulate in their own church, does not mean that I think any of you Protestants were, or are, right.
I think you should all rejoin the Catholic Church and bring your gifts back to add to the whole so we can be one big Christian Community. That’s what I honestly think. It would be wrong for me to lie and say, “hey it’s fine with me that you are Protestant.” I understand why you are Protestant if that’s the way you were raised, because one wants to follow the faith they were trained in by loving family members, and like I said there are good things about it, you follow Jesus, you were not raised as Satanists, etc. But you are lacking so much. It makes me sad that you do not see the lack.
However, it is important that Catholics also not fall into the trap of thinking, “hey, if we all love and follow Jesus, then one church is as good as another” or “hey, Catholics have their truth and Protestants also have their truth, maybe we should appreciate the other guy’s truth” etc.
The whole reason why previous Popes back in the 19th century and early 20th century did not promote ecumenism of any sort, and told us to burn Protestant Bibles and such, and put up many obstacles to Catholics marrying Protestants, is they did not want Catholics to be misled in this way, and led away from the Church. Now I know nobody likes to be told they are wrong, but the fact that I see good things in many Protestant people, and even see some good features in, say, Protestant church services (for example, better music and better preaching) that Catholics would do well to emulate in their own church, does not mean that I think any of you Protestants were, or are, right.
I think you should all rejoin the Catholic Church and bring your gifts back to add to the whole so we can be one big Christian Community. That’s what I honestly think. It would be wrong for me to lie and say, “hey it’s fine with me that you are Protestant.” I understand why you are Protestant if that’s the way you were raised, because one wants to follow the faith they were trained in by loving family members, and like I said there are good things about it, you follow Jesus, you were not raised as Satanists, etc. But you are lacking so much. It makes me sad that you do not see the lack.
F
fhansen
Guest
They’re not 100% wrong; they’re just not perfectly correct. That “privilege” has been given to the Church Christ established at the beginning. Not because its better, but only because there can only be one Church, “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4).
Historically the Church received her “deposit of faith”, God’s revelation, her knowledge, directly from Christ and has safe-gaurded, preserved, and preached from that source from before the New Testament was even written. She understands the faith both by Scripture and her own living legacy (Tradition). Protestants, OTOH, rely mainly or exclusively on Scripture alone for their authority. The problem with this is that Scripture isn’t always perfectly clear; it can be vague or seem ambiguous or even contradictory at times. It is subject to interpretation and so each individual interpreter becomes their own authority in reality, sort of like private popes. And this is the reason Protestants often disagree, sometimes vehemently, on relevant beliefs. Disunity is bred and continues to produce more offspring simply because the source, Scripture, can’t tell you what it really means. That, defining and clarifying and spreading the gospel, is the very purpose of the Church. And even logically such an entity must have a continuous, traceable history back to the beginnings of Christianity.
Historically the Church received her “deposit of faith”, God’s revelation, her knowledge, directly from Christ and has safe-gaurded, preserved, and preached from that source from before the New Testament was even written. She understands the faith both by Scripture and her own living legacy (Tradition). Protestants, OTOH, rely mainly or exclusively on Scripture alone for their authority. The problem with this is that Scripture isn’t always perfectly clear; it can be vague or seem ambiguous or even contradictory at times. It is subject to interpretation and so each individual interpreter becomes their own authority in reality, sort of like private popes. And this is the reason Protestants often disagree, sometimes vehemently, on relevant beliefs. Disunity is bred and continues to produce more offspring simply because the source, Scripture, can’t tell you what it really means. That, defining and clarifying and spreading the gospel, is the very purpose of the Church. And even logically such an entity must have a continuous, traceable history back to the beginnings of Christianity.
Last edited:
M
MT1926
Guest
AMEN to that.
Don’t see it happening in our lifetime, but totally agree.
God Bless
W
Wannano
Guest
That is a judgemental cheap shot!Tis_Bearself:
Because he isn’t interested in coming back. He’s interested in taking cheap shots because he’s uncomfortable with the claims of the Church.
G
GratefulFred
Guest
We should understand better what Christ had to say to the 11 Apostles at the Last Supper - His last instructions to them. Read John Chapters 14-17.
Christ said the Holy Spirit would guide them and remind them until His return. Christ was talking to HIS chosen leaders, not to anyone who would later assume a leadership role on their own authority, no matter how well meaning.
The ‘protesters’ had legitimate issues. They went about addressing those issues in the wrong way.
And we should remember there were a number of new LOCAL groups that differed between each other and there were economic advantages to setting themselves up as the new leaders but without any clear authority that Christ approved of their split away.
Christ said the Holy Spirit would guide them and remind them until His return. Christ was talking to HIS chosen leaders, not to anyone who would later assume a leadership role on their own authority, no matter how well meaning.
The ‘protesters’ had legitimate issues. They went about addressing those issues in the wrong way.
And we should remember there were a number of new LOCAL groups that differed between each other and there were economic advantages to setting themselves up as the new leaders but without any clear authority that Christ approved of their split away.
W
Wannano
Guest
Tis, I like you. I hope you understand my question. If we were all to “come back” and join the CC would we be expanding the 10% of the CC who sincerely believe and practice their faith or would we expand the other 90% who practice on their own terms? Take some time to think on it.
O
omgriley
Guest
Where are you getting your numbers from?
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
I have read that in articles and believe some Catholics have stated it here. Am I incorrect?Wannano:
Where are you getting your numbers from?
O
omgriley
Guest
You’re just over-generalizing it without any prove. Your claim that only 10% of the world’s Catholics “sincerely believe and practice their faith” is just improvable. Maybe that’s so with American and Eastern European Catholics, but Asian and African American Catholics are known to be very orthodox in their beliefs.
Last edited:
P
PJH_74
Guest
Lovely, let’s fight amongst ourselves. We are the BODY of Christ. I hear plenty of gnashing of teeth here and amongst plenty of other Christians (often conservative) that the world has turned too secular and Christians are a losing minority. Maybe you find solace that the continuation of Christ’s authority is handed down through the Pope. Maybe you find solace in having a stripped down personal relationship with Jesus. Maybe the ceremony, bells, and smells bring you closer to God. Even amongst Catholics there is plenty of interpretation of what the practice of Christian faith is; something I often this variety scoffed at. We are better than this.
W
Wannano
Guest
I am not trying to “stir the pot” so I hope you understand the percentages is not what I was establishing.Wannano:
You’re just over-generalizing it without any prove. Your claim that only 10% of the world’s Catholics “sincerely believe and practice their faith” is just improvable. Maybe that’s so with American and Eastern European Catholics, but Asian and African American Catholics are known to be very orthodox in their beliefs.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
You’re talking to the wrong Catholic. I don’t lay awake nights worrying about whether how some Catholic other than me chooses to practice his or her faith. If they come up to me and start making a speech about how they just had an abortion and feel fine about it, or missed Mass 50 times and think that’s perfectly OK, then maybe I say something, but normally it is between the person and God and maybe the priest at church how we practice our faith individually.
Perhaps this is a great lack in myself, but I would rather someone be staying connected to the Catholic Church and the Real Jesus even by a tiny thread, than be gone entirely. I have certainly had my times of being distant. I committed grave sins. I received Communion in an unworthy state. I missed Mass. I didn’t make my “Easter duty” (the name for the once-a-year Confession requirement). I just sucked. So I am not in any position to point a finger at somebody else. I give thanks to God that I was able to mend my ways because I feel better about it and it’s a better way to live than when I was sinning. I wasn’t happy with myself. I wasn’t in good situations. These other people should have a chance to come back too or to have whatever they can have with God.
I don’t want a Church made up of 1 percent of the people on earth who think they are “perfect”, who never “color outside the lines” in their “Methodist Coloring Book”. I want a Church made up of 100 percent of the people on earth who are sincerely trying.
edited to add, it kind of reminds me of that part in “1776” where Ben Franklin says if we don’t all hang together, we will surely all hang separately.
Last edited:
O
omgriley
Guest
That’s fine. It just appears that you have a view of Catholics which may not be accurate.
W
Wannano
Guest
I can see that I might not be clear in what I am saying. Maybe should reask it this way: is the CC really sure it wants all of us back enmasse on Jan 1, 2018. After all, we have a history of individual thinking and a lot of baggage. We would undoubtedly expand the numbers that currently do not profess belief in Transubstantiation, do not go to confession or keep the Mass obligations.Wannano:
You’re talking to the wrong Catholic. I don’t lay awake nights worrying about whether how some Catholic other than me chooses to practice his or her faith. If they come up to me and start making a speech about how they just had an abortion and feel fine about it, or missed Mass 50 times and think that’s perfectly OK, then maybe I say something, but normally it is between the person and God and maybe the priest at church how we practice our faith individually.
Perhaps this is a great lack in myself, but I would rather someone be staying connected to the Catholic Church and the Real Jesus even by a tiny thread, than be gone entirely. I have certainly had my times of being distant. I committed grave sins. I received Communion in an unworthy state. I missed Mass. I didn’t make my “Easter duty” (the name for the once-a-year Confession requirement). I just sucked. So I am not in any position to point a finger at somebody else. I give thanks to God that I was able to mend my ways because I feel better about it and it’s a better way to live than when I was sinning. I wasn’t happy with myself. I wasn’t in good situations. These other people should have a chance to come back too or to have whatever they can have with God.
I don’t want a Church made up of 1 percent of the people on earth who think they are “perfect”, who never “color outside the lines” in their “Methodist Coloring Book”. I want a Church made up of 100 percent of the people on earth who are sincerely trying.
edited to add, it kind of reminds me of that part in “1776” where Ben Franklin says if we don’t all hang together, we will surely all hang separately.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
How is this different in any way from what is going on in the Church now, or what has been going on in the Church for literally centuries? You surely don’t think everybody was a good, sinless, faithful Catholic who believed and understood everything in past eras? There have been “bad Catholics” since day 1. There will be “bad Catholics” till the end of time. There will be debate over what makes a Catholic a “bad Catholic” till the end of time. Creating a schism just adds bad on top of whatever bad is already going on. Mending the schism would remove bad from the pile.
W
Wannano
Guest
I am 100% sure that may be true.Wannano:
That’s fine. It just appears that you have a view of Catholics which may not be accurate.
M
MichaelP3
Guest
I don’t know for sure but the number of Catholics practising ABC would be pretty much all over. Maybe the question is rather how many "teachings should not be believed " and then the same question could be asked?
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
I guess we all have different ways of thinking. To me mending the schism would be adding bad to the pile, that is, if all non-Catholics are as bad as what I gather they are in the eyes of a lot of Catholics.Wannano:
How is this different in any way from what is going on in the Church now, or what has been going on in the Church for literally centuries? You surely don’t think everybody was a good, sinless, faithful Catholic who believed and understood everything in past eras? There have been “bad Catholics” since day 1. There will be “bad Catholics” till the end of time. There will be debate over what makes a Catholic a “bad Catholic” till the end of time. Creating a schism just adds bad on top of whatever bad is already going on. Mending the schism would remove bad from the pile.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
“A lot of Catholics” need to get over themselves. From time to time, I might include myself in that list.
- Status