Why should we bother going to mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jon_S_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am a Catholic Candidate and I thought I had a good handle on what the church teaches, then I got on these forums and frankly am not so sure I want to be a Catholic anymore.

Now let me tell you coming from Protestantism, I was able to see the Church’s authority, papal authority, The importance of Tradition, Mary and the Saints, infant baptism, the Eucharist, Confession and I cleared those hurdles no problem.

I can see how it is all historical and biblical, and the revealed truth of God.

I thought I had cleared all my stumbling blocks to becoming Catholic until I got on these forums.

It was my understanding that in order to be saved and go to purgatory/heaven, one need to have a heart for Christ, be Baptized and in a state of sanctifying Grace at death. We must have faith in God, and this true saving faith is manifested in our deeds (James 2). We must follow the 2 greatest commandments (1 Love God and 2 Love your neighbor).

Unfortunately, after being on this forum, I have come into discussion with Catholic after Catholic, who not only disagree, but vehemently oppose this position.

Most of them completely ignore the first commandment, saying “All you need is Love of neighbor” saying that in Matt 25, everyone is judged by their works. (which I agree with, but the Sheep called Jesus Lord, so isn’t that a prerequisite to being a sheep).

Others say, that all roads lead to heaven and atheists, buddhist, hindu’s, etc… are all saved. Saying “I believe that salvation is for everyone regardless of their beliefs”. When this individual was pressed, they said “well of course not child abusers and people who commit genocide and other heinous acts”

So before I decide that maybe all roads do lead to the top of the mountain and I may as well sit and watch all of you struggle to the top, wait for death and take the elevator past you all, because your long struggles are for not according to all these catholics on here,

Can someone please clear up what the Church teaches here on this issue.

Also, if you answer with all religions are equal and Catholicism is just another one of them, I ask why do we evangelize, and do missions and partake in the sacraments.

Thanks!
Just stick to what you know to be true and what the church teaches. Don’t listen to everyone on the forum, people on these boards are just regular people with their own ideas and beliefs, it’s not like they are priests or people who really represent the church in an authoritative way, they are just people with their own ideas. Plus some may claim to be catholic and are really not and some are in various stages of spiritual growth so they may not be aware of how wrong they are. 😉 So take what people say with a grain of salt and not as a serious learning tool towards your own spiritual growth. When people say things that are in line with the church teachings then yes accept it but when people say things that doesn’t line up then reject it. People on these boards are not trained theologians, they are just regular people with their own ideas. As long as you keep that in mind, this forum can be very helpful and useful. Plus when people say weird things, take a look at what they have listed as their religion, all on here are not catholic, some are jewish, some are atheist and some are protestant etc.

It’s like going to a health forum, you can get some good ideas but the people on those boards are NOT doctors. You can get some good ideas from them but you listen to your doctor first and foremost. The people on these boards are NOT priests or trained theologians. 😉 You can get some good ideas but you listen to what the church teaches first and foremost. 🙂 To stop going to church because of this forum is like not going to a doctor because of confusing things people say on a health forum.
 
The people who say those things are not professing the faith. There are so many Catholics in the world, that we are bound to have more than a small share of people who don’t really believe in the Catholic faith. One thing I have noticed with them is that they see the Church as a political organization where, if only they can get some critical mass of supporters, they can somehow affect “change”.

In the case of things which obviously cannot change, they are terribly mistaken. People like that are really harming the Catholic Church these days, especially in the West. The best thing you can do is to finish the process and then show them how to properly profess your faith.
 
Fr. Groeschel once said, “Any sociologist will tell you that if you take a cross-section of 1.3 Billion people on one end you will find very holy people like Mother Theresa and on the other end don’t be surprised if you find Dracula.”
 
I am a Catholic Candidate and I thought I had a good handle on what the church teaches, then I got on these forums and frankly am not so sure I want to be a Catholic anymore.
Please know there are all kind of people on this forum. Some are very misinformed or could be stubborn with their own wrong theory. Please do not be disturbed. There are all kind of individuals.They do not represent the Catholic Church.
 
Thank you!

I have one and its well highlighted, which was part of what was so troubling about my discussions in this board with many supposed
Catholics who spoke in sharp contrast to the catechism.My friend that is why you follow the Church and not the guy in the pew next to you or here on the intarwebz forum.

The Church teaches the fullness of truth. Individuals, for a variety of reasons, have a strong proclivity to talk through their hats.

This is one of the reasons that St. Paul told Timothy, “Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” and St. James tells us “Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness.”

John Martignoni has a brilliant way of dealing with this on his website (Bible Christian Society)
If you want to call yourself Catholic, but if you want to pick and choose for yourself which of the Church’s teachings to accept and which to reject, you give everyone else who calls themselves Catholic the right to do the same thing.
For example, you believe women should be priests…in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1577 states, “Only a baptized man validly receives ordination…For this reason the ordination of women is not possible!” You don’t believe that…well, that’s fine…[RIP] just tear that page out of your Catechism…you just made it a Catechism of your Catholic Church…not mine.
But remember, if you can throw doctrines out, so can everyone else who calls themselves Catholic. That gives Joe Parishioner over at St. Doubting Thomas Catholic Church the right to throw out the Church’s social justice teachings…he doesn’t feel like feeding the hungry, caring for the poor, and all that other “bleeding heart” stuff - Paragraphs 2401 -2463 [RIP]…he just made it a Catechism of his Catholic Church…not mine and not yours.
You believe contraception is okay? Paragraph 2370 says contraception is intrinsically evil! [RIP] Joe Parishioner doesn’t like what the Church teaches on the death penalty - Paragraphs 2266-2267**[RIP]**. You don’t like what it teaches on pages 55-60 [RIP]. He doesn’t like what it teaches on pages 128-140 [RIP]

Can you see what’s happening? I heard it said once that there is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood in the United States, but no shortage of vocations to the Papacy! If we don’t believe in all of it, if we each appoint ourselves Pope and throw out a doctrine here or a doctrine there, then our faith is no longer Catholic.
 
What, exactly, are others saying that makes you think they reject the teachings of the Church? Most Catholics here do, in fact, adhere to the teachings of the Church. Where you will find debate is on the things we cannot know, such as the fate of unbaptized babies. For their fate, we hope in the extraordinary grace and mercy of Jesus Christ.

Additionally, we may not presume damnation of any soul, so perhaps some have argued that we must hope that every soul is saved (though it is highly unlikely). We also do not know how a soul may repent in the moments before death. Here, again, is a theory and debate on the extraordinary means of grace, which we know nothing about, and thus it is merely opinion and theory.

But as to the teachings of the Church, I doubt very many Catholics here actually oppose the doctrine that those who die in unrepentant mortal sin, or those who reject the Gospel while knowing it to be true, are damned. I think you may be misinterpreting the hope we have for the salvation of all souls, to be a rejection of the doctrine of damnation. In reality, this is not the case, and we must hope for the salvation of every soul that has passed, whether they appeared to be wicked or not. We cannot judge, only hope.

Also, you must choose to enter or reject the Catholic faith purely based on the faithfulness of individuals within the fold. There have been imperfect Catholics since the beginning. This says nothing of the Truth the Church preaches.
PeaceInChrist said:
Also, you must choose to enter or reject the Catholic faith purely based on the faithfulness of individuals within the fold. There have been imperfect Catholics since the beginning. This says nothing of the Truth the Church preaches.
I made an error here:

I must correct this to “you must NOT choose to enter or reject the Catholic faith based on the faithfulness of individuals within the fold.”
 
Fr. Groeschel once said, “Any sociologist will tell you that if you take a cross-section of 1.3 Billion people on one end you will find very holy people like Mother Theresa and on the other end don’t be surprised if you find Dracula.”
Good one. I wonder where I fit in.😃
 
What, exactly, are others saying that makes you think they reject the teachings of the Church? Most Catholics here do, in fact, adhere to the teachings of the Church. Where you will find debate is on the things we cannot know, such as the fate of unbaptized babies. For their fate, we hope in the extraordinary grace and mercy of Jesus Christ.

Additionally, we may not presume damnation of any soul, so perhaps some have argued that we must hope that every soul is saved (though it is highly unlikely). We also do not know how a soul may repent in the moments before death. Here, again, is a theory and debate on the extraordinary means of grace, which we know nothing about, and thus it is merely opinion and theory.

But as to the teachings of the Church, I doubt very many Catholics here actually oppose the doctrine that those who die in unrepentant mortal sin, or those who reject the Gospel while knowing it to be true, are damned. I think you may be misinterpreting the hope we have for the salvation of all souls, to be a rejection of the doctrine of damnation. In reality, this is not the case, and we must hope for the salvation of every soul that has passed, whether they appeared to be wicked or not. We cannot judge, only hope.

Also, you must choose to enter or reject the Catholic faith purely based on the faithfulness of individuals within the fold. There have been imperfect Catholics since the beginning. This says nothing of the Truth the Church preaches.
In this forum, I have seen people claiming to be Catholic who support abortion rights and who claim that support comes from, of all places, Catholic social teaching. That’s just one example in the past few months I have been here. I think I remember some people who claimed to be Catholic who supported same-sex marriage. One thread (which was deleted) had people arguing that there was nothing wrong with a gay mass.

So… yeah… this person does have a legitimate complaint. But my point to him is that he ought not judge Catholicism by people on the internet. I accept Catholic teaching at every level and point. That means I am ipso facto opposed by a lot of people who claim to be Catholic. It’s not going to be any different for him. What matters is that we pursue the truth and apprehend it within the Catholic Church. Once you know the truth, it really matters very little what other people say and do.
 
Hi Jon S,

I think it’s very important on a Catholic forum for those who identify themselves as “Catholic” to provide, or be prepared to provide, verification that what they say is in conformity with Catholic teaching. If they don’t provide it in their post, and it’s questionable in any way or new to you, ask for verification. (From your opening post, I’m thinking you may be better informed than some Catholics.)

For instance, in one of the examples you gave
(Quote:
Others say, that all roads lead to heaven and atheists, buddhist, hindu’s, etc… are all saved. Saying "I believe that salvation is for everyone regardless of their beliefs
".),
you could/should have asked them where that teaching is given in the Catechism of the Catholic Church or some other official Church document. Ask for a direct link, or at least an identiication specific enough so you can locate and read the actual text of the teaching without too much trouble. (For someone to just say “The Council of Trent said it” - would hardly be specific enough!!) If they don’t respond to your request, or if the verification they provide is not an actual Church document, then do not trust what they posted.
 
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott

**Membership of the Church is necessary for all men for salvation. (De fide.) **

In the Caput Firmiter, the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared: “The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved” (extra quam nullus omnino salvatur). D 430. This was the teaching also of the Union Council of Florence (D 714), and of Popes Innocent III (0 42)) and Boniface VIII in the Bull ‘Unam sanctam’ (D 468), Clement VI (D 570 b), Benedict XIV (D 1473), Pius IX (0 1647, 1677), Leo XI1I (0 1955), Pius XII in the Encyclical Mystici Corporis" (D 2286, 2.288).

As against modern religious indifferentism, Pius IX declared: “By Faith it is to be firmly held that outside the Apostolic Roman Church none can achieve salvation. This is the only ark of salvation. He who does not enter into it, will perish in the flood. Nevertheless equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion, are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord" (D 1647). The last proposition holds out the possibility that people who in point of fact (actu) do not belong to the Church can achieve salvation. C£ D 1677; 796 (votum baptismi).

The necessity for belonging to the Church is not merely a necessity of precept (necessitas praccepti), but also a necessity of means (nee. medii), as the comparison with the Ark, the means of salvation from the biblical flood, plainly shows. The necessity of means is, however, not an absolute necessity, but a hypothetical one. In special circumstances, namely, in the case of invincible ignorance or of incapability, actual membership of the Church can be replaced by the desire (votum) for the same. This need not be expressly (explicite) present, but can also be included in the moral readiness faithfully to fulfill the will of God (voturn implicitum). In this manner also those who are in fact outside the Catholic Church can achieve salvation.

Christ ordained affiliation to the Church by founding the Church as an institution unto salvation for all men. He endowed the Apostles with His authority, gave them a universal mandate to teach and baptize and made eternal salvation dependent on the acceptance of His teaching and the reception of Baptism. Luke 10, 16; Mt. 10, 40; 18, 17; 29,19; Mk.16, 15 et seq. That those who, in innocent ignorance, do not know the true Church of Christ, but who are nevertheless ready to bow to the demands of the Divine Will, will not be cast out, springs from the Divine Justice, and from the doctrine of God’s general will of salvation, which is clearly proved in the Scriptures. (1 Tim. 2, 4). The Apostles teach the necessity of the Church for salvation by promulgating Faith in Christ and His Gospel as a condition for salvation. Peter confesses before the High Council: “Neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts 4, 12). Cf Gal. I, 8; Tit. 3, 10 et seq.; 2 John 10 et seq.

It is the unanimous conviction of the Fathers that salvation cannot be achieved outside the Church. This principle was extended not only to pagans but to heretics and schismatics as well. St. Irenaeus teaches that: “in the efficacy of the spirit all those have no part, who do not hasten to the Church; rather they, by their evil teaching and their evil deeds, rob themselves of life. For where the Church is, there is also the spirit of God, and where the spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace" (Adv. haer. III 24, I). Origen formally declares: “Outside the Church nobody will be saved” (extra ecclesiam nemo salvatur; In Jesu Nave hom. 3, 5); similarly St. Cyprian: “Outside the Church there is no salvation" (salus extra ecciesiam non est; Ep. 73, 21). The Fathers, for example, St. Cyprian, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, regard, as types of the necessity of the Church for salvation, the saving Ark of Noah and the House of Rahab OOS. 2, 18 et seq.). In the Primitive Church the conviction of her necessity for salvation found practical expression in her missionary zeal, in the readiness of her children to suffer martyrdom and in her battle against heresy.

In view of the stress laid upon the necessity of membership of the Church for salvation it is understandable that the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church is mentioned only hesitantly. St. Ambrose and St. Augustine admit that catechumens who depart this life before the reception of Baptism can win salvation on the ground of their faith, their desire for Baptism, and their internal conversion (St. Ambrose, De obitu Val. 51; St. Augustine, De hapt. IV 22,29). On the other hand, Gennadius of Marseilles denies them this possibility, except in the case of martyrdom (De eccl. Dogm. 74). St. Augustine distinguishes also, not indeed using the terminology, between material and formal heretics. Thus he does regard material heretics as heretics properly so-called (Ep. 43, I, I). He seems to estimate their possibility of salvation otherwise than he does that of heretics proper.

St. Thomas, agreeing with Tradition, teaches the general necessity of the Church for salvation. Expos. symb. a. 9. On the other hand, he concedes that a person may be saved extrasacramentally by baptism of desire and therefore the possibility of salvation without actual membership of the Church by reason of a desire to be a member of the Church. S. th. III 68, 2.

As against the reproach of intolerance a distinction must be made between dogmatic and civil tolerance. The Church rejects the dogmatic tolerance which would concede the same power of justification and the same value to all religions, or to all Christian confessions (Indifferentism); for there is only one truth. But the Church recognizes the propriety of civil tolerance, by preaching the commandment of neighborly charity towards all men, even those in error. Cf. the prayers of the Liturgy on Good Friday.
 
In this forum, I have seen people claiming to be Catholic who support abortion rights and who claim that support comes from, of all places, Catholic social teaching. That’s just one example in the past few months I have been here. I think I remember some people who claimed to be Catholic who supported same-sex marriage. One thread (which was deleted) had people arguing that there was nothing wrong with a gay mass.

So… yeah… this person does have a legitimate complaint. But my point to him is that he ought not judge Catholicism by people on the internet. I accept Catholic teaching at every level and point. That means I am ipso facto opposed by a lot of people who claim to be Catholic. It’s not going to be any different for him. What matters is that we pursue the truth and apprehend it within the Catholic Church. Once you know the truth, it really matters very little what other people say and do.
I do agree that there are many unfaithful Catholics. I just didn’t know there were very many here. I must be spending my time in the wrong threads:o
 
I do agree that there are many unfaithful Catholics. I just didn’t know there were very many here. I must be spending my time in the wrong threads:o
A lot of them get deleted. I don’t know about assigning adjectives like “many” to the numbers. I have not been here that long. I think they are still a minority but they stand out because of the dissent and sometimes outrageous justifications. For example, in one of the abortion threads, I remember a person appealing to Catholic social justice as grounds to support legalized abortions.

Any thread which is generally about political wedge issues like abortion and same-sex marriage will see them come out quite plainly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top