Young believers and Traditional Catholicism vs Evangelicalism

  • Thread starter Thread starter straggleyway
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hate to double post, but I wanted to add this, and as I can not edit my original post, I will have to. I thought this might interest you all.
I’m not sure how familiar everyone is with Our Lady of La Salette, but apparently while most of the revelations she delivered concerned the immediate (19th century) future, a few involved later times. She said that the presence of the Church in Europe would be greatly reduced, due to the sinful acts of clergy and laity alike, but that before the world ended, England would be reconverted. Perhaps it won’t be from Protestantism that it is converted, as one would have thought, but secularism and Islam…
Also, you mentioned that a ‘minority’ listens when the Church speaks because it is right, in their opinion… Catholicism is not an opinion one subscribes to. It is a reality one submits to, or rejects.
 
GeorgeSword,

These debates are always interesting because you come across different styles. Your claim that…“We do not seek to have influence in the government…”. I nearly fell off my chair. Are you quite serious? As a guide, here is the webpage of your organisation in the UK

catholic-ew.org.uk/ccb/catholic_church/legislation_and_public_policy

They have lobbied on the following issue because they were counter to Catholic dogma:
  • Equality Bill
  • Coroners and Justice Bill
  • Human Fertilisation
  • Catholic Adoption Agencies
  • Living Wills
So… “We do not seek to have influence in the government…” - seems a bit lame now…

On a separate note, you also say “If they are immoral, as they are now, we do what we can to change them.”

I was raised by Catholic parents - however I left the religion as I view it be immoral. I simply do not agree that Catholic ideas are how human beings should behave in the 21st century. I left out of principle. So I reject your accusation that I am immoral - I have a personal system for determining right from wrong. Thankfully, it does not include Catholic dogma.
 
straggleyway said:
GeorgeSword,

These debates are always interesting because you come across different styles. Your claim that…“We do not seek to have influence in the government…”. I nearly fell off my chair. Are you quite serious? As a guide, here is the webpage of your organisation in the UK

catholic-ew.org.uk/ccb/catholic_church/legislation_and_public_policy

They have lobbied on the following issue because they were counter to Catholic dogma:
  • Equality Bill
  • Coroners and Justice Bill
  • Human Fertilisation
  • Catholic Adoption Agencies
  • Living Wills
So… “We do not seek to have influence in the government…” - seems a bit lame now…

On a separate note, you also say “If they are immoral, as they are now, we do what we can to change them.”

I was raised by Catholic parents - however I left the religion as I view it be immoral. I simply do not agree that Catholic ideas are how human beings should behave in the 21st century. I left out of principle. So I reject your accusation that I am immoral - I have a personal system for determining right from wrong. Thankfully, it does not include Catholic dogma.
Click to expand...
You misunderstand. If the government is sponsoring something highly immoral (and these things are usually very clearly, visibly immoral) such as abortion or homosexual ‘marriage’ then yes, you can expect Catholics to counter it. But what I mean to say is that that is not the point. The Church is not a political group. It is Christ’s Church which carries down His teachings through the ages, defending them from heresy and making them known to all with an ear to listen.
Furthermore, I never said you were immoral. I don’t know you. I cannot comment on that. God has given us all basic human morals, and any man with the ability of reason has that moral compass to go on. Of course, we can ignore it, too.
I will say, though, that just because someone has the ability to determine right from wrong (as all sane people do) that does not mean they will follow it. I am sure that abortionists, by their own twisted reasoning, have judged that what they do is alright.
 
GeorgeSword,

Let me be clear - I have nothing against anyones freedom to believe in whatever god they wish. I know some non-believers are quite anti-religion - I’m not at all. If you wish you conduct yourself like that, I have nothing against it. I tire of atheists doing this.

However, once you cross the line of declaring that your beliefs determine how everyone else should behave - then I will react passionately. First, you claim…“The Church is not a political group”. Whilst you also declare…“If the government is sponsoring something highly immoral (and these things are usually very clearly, visibly immoral) such as abortion or homosexual ‘marriage’ then yes, you can expect Catholics to counter it.”

George - that is politics. It is the opinion of your organisation that these things are immoral. You declare these things are immoral based on your specific ancient texts and revelations from your specific god. I dont agree with you. In a fair society, why should I change my moral principles based on what you believe? You are, by definition, political animals - you declare how everyone else should behave based on what **you **believe.

That is politics.

As an amusing example, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State recently made comments on the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland. An intensely political debate. And why did he do this?
  • the EU refused to recognise Europe’s Christian heritage in the text of the Lisbon Treaty.
  • EU ruling abortion provision should be treated as a “medical service” no different from any other treatment.
He is conducting political lobbying on the Churchs agenda. **It is overtly political. **

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/6251741/Vatican-issues-Lisbon-Treaty-warning-to-Irish-voters.html
 
Again, you do not understand what I am trying to say. I mean to say that the Church is a religious group, a body of believers, the Body of Christ. Many members of the Church, even the clergy, have been involved in politics, but what I am trying to say is that that is not the primary goal of the Church. It runs far deeper than that.
You have the freedom to believe what you will. If you wish to worship the chair you’re sitting in, if you wish to worship a strawberry bush or if you wish to worship nothing, you are free to do so. The Church declares the truth, and it is there to be found by those who seek it.
I used abortion as an example earlier. There, for instance, I will say that people have no rights. It is logically, clearly, totally morally wrong, unless you also consider the painful murder followed by dissection to be alright when performed on adults, also. That is no different. It is a terrible injustice and no one has the right to believe it is alright. The Church is certainly involved in the fight again this, but it is far from alone in it. The goal here is not to change political power or to force people to believe in God, but to stop a terrible injustice.
 
No George, you are quite, quite wrong.

I understand that your argument is that your organisation is a religious one or “I mean to say that the Church is a religious group, a body of believers, the Body of Christ.” as you say.

However, it is a “body of believers” that actively campaigns for laws to be change on the basis of their beliefs

You appear to want to project your organisation as purely an ‘organisation of theology’ - ie it is only the *people *that are political - that is not the aim of the church etc etc

for example you say: “Many members of the Church, even the clergy, have been involved in politics, but what I am trying to say is that that is not the primary goal of the Church.”

Absolutely I accept it is not the primary goal. BUT that certainly does that mean it is not a political organisation. Your organisation, ie not the people - the Church itself - has issued formal statements and policy documents on how it wants to change the laws of countries.

That is politics.

For your argument to be true, the church would have to never release such statements. Do you seriously believe the church could change in this way?

You continue in this political tone with your example of abortion. You say “That is no different. It is a terrible injustice and no one has the right to believe it is alright.”

Wrong

That is your stated opinion. I declare the right to believe whether it is right or wrong. We live in modern democracies. Who are are you to declare my rights?! Arrogance in the extreme.

I have often been asked ‘is abortion right **OR **wrong?’ - it is the wrong question! Comparing all abortions as the same is ridiculous. **Each case needs to be evaluated separately.
** **But I reject your claim outright - I have the right to believe it is right if I so wish. **
 
ljubim said:
I couldn’t agree more!!! At mass my ears hurt when they hear stumming guitars and see the so-called modern choir bouncing around. I can just picture the angel guarding the tabernacle sticking his fingers in his ears and sheilding Jesus from all of that garbage. Unfortunately the nearest Latin mass is two hours away, but I go off to college next year and there will be St. Boniface in Pittsburgh only a ten minute drive. :)👍 People seem to have lost respect for the mass, we need to make them realize what they have done!

Everybody who’s sad about the decline of birth rates, remember, the good Catholics who will have a bunch of kids and teach them the faith aren’t on the pill! While the relativists, atheists and agnostics are!!😃
Click to expand...
Psalm 28:2 (New International Version)
2 Hear my cry for mercy
as I call to you for help,
as I lift up my hands
toward your Most Holy Place.

Psalm 63:4 (New International Version)

4 I will praise you as long as I live,
and in your name I will lift up my hands.

Psalm 134:2 (New International Version)

2 Lift up your hands in the sanctuary
and praise the LORD.

Psalm 141:2 (New International Version)

2 May my prayer be set before you like incense;
may the lifting up of my hands be like the evening sacrifice.

2 Samuel 6:20-21 (New International Version)

20 When David returned home to bless his household, Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet him and said, “How the king of Israel has distinguished himself today, disrobing in the sight of the slave girls of his servants as any vulgar fellow would!”

21 David said to Michal, "It was before the LORD, who chose me rather than your father or anyone from his house when he appointed me ruler over the LORD’s people Israel—I will celebrate before the LORD.

Psalm 150 (New International Version)

Psalm 150

1 Praise the LORD. [a]
Praise God in his sanctuary;
praise him in his mighty heavens.

2 Praise him for his acts of power;
praise him for his surpassing greatness.

3 Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet,
praise him with the harp and lyre,

4 praise him with tambourine and dancing,
praise him with the strings and flute,

5 praise him with the clash of cymbals,
praise him with resounding cymbals.

6 Let everything that has breath praise the LORD.
Praise the LORD.
 
straggleyway said:
No George, you are quite, quite wrong.

I understand that your argument is that your organisation is a religious one or “I mean to say that the Church is a religious group, a body of believers, the Body of Christ.” as you say.

However, it is a “body of believers” that actively campaigns for laws to be change on the basis of their beliefs

You appear to want to project your organisation as purely an ‘organisation of theology’ - ie it is only the *people *that are political - that is not the aim of the church etc etc

for example you say: “Many members of the Church, even the clergy, have been involved in politics, but what I am trying to say is that that is not the primary goal of the Church.”

Absolutely I accept it is not the primary goal. BUT that certainly does that mean it is not a political organisation. Your organisation, ie not the people - the Church itself - has issued formal statements and policy documents on how it wants to change the laws of countries.

That is politics.

For your argument to be true, the church would have to never release such statements. Do you seriously believe the church could change in this way?

You continue in this political tone with your example of abortion. You say “That is no different. It is a terrible injustice and no one has the right to believe it is alright.”

Wrong

That is your stated opinion. I declare the right to believe whether it is right or wrong. We live in modern democracies. Who are are you to declare my rights?! Arrogance in the extreme.

I have often been asked ‘is abortion right **OR **wrong?’ - it is the wrong question! Comparing all abortions as the same is ridiculous. **Each case needs to be evaluated separately.
** **But I reject your claim outright - I have the right to believe it is right if I so wish. **
Click to expand...
I mean no offense to you but I don’t need to argue with the deaf. I am no one to tell you anything, but perhaps God is. Whether or not you listen to Him or not is up to you. These things are not my opinions, but His Word, as well as the basic human morals infused into the soul.
If you wish, why not start another thread debating the morality of abortion? I’d like to discuss the topic with you here, and abortion isn’t the topic. It was merely an example I used in passing.
 
straggleyway said:
Hi all,

I would be interested in your thoughts on this. If you look at the demographics of catholic churchs worldwide, the key point is that congregations are, on average, getting old i.e. over 55-60.

This is couple with a progression of youth believers moving to evangelical churches. Often developing countries are singled out as proof the catholic church can survive, but recently I see that the evangelicals have tapped into Brazil too tinyurl.com/y9rqqw7

The numbers of church-going catholics in the UK is at 1 million. In 20 years, it will be counted in hundreds of thousands for the first time. I would like to hear your thoughts on what the shape will be of the catholic church in 20 years time, considering a huge number of congregations will die off and also that young believers are leaving to evangelicalism.

best regards
Click to expand...
I’m 15, and doing my Confirmation.
I think its because, no one is raised as a proper Catholic anymore. When I go to confirmation, it feels like a waste of time. Everybody just talks, doesn’t pay attention. All my instructor teaches is extremely basic catechism. The sacraments, etc.
I’ve known all that since first-second grade.
I was home schooled until freshman year, at which I attend a regular high school. My mom ordered a religion book from “Seton”. I was forced to do it against my will for six years. I’m glad I did however, when I saw all my Catholic friends unable to answer questions about religion. They just “believe it”, without understanding what they believe in.

We just aren’t as educated in the faith 🙂
 
straggleyway said:
No George, you are quite, quite wrong.

I understand that your argument is that your organisation is a religious one or “I mean to say that the Church is a religious group, a body of believers, the Body of Christ.” as you say.

However, it is a “body of believers” that actively campaigns for laws to be change on the basis of their beliefs

That is your stated opinion. I declare the right to believe whether it is right or wrong. We live in modern democracies. Who are are you to declare my rights?! Arrogance in the extreme.

**I have often been asked ‘is abortion right **OR ****wrong?’ - it is the wrong question! Comparing all abortions as the same is ridiculous. Each case needs to be evaluated separately.
**But I reject your claim outright - I have the right to believe it is right if I so wish. **
Click to expand...
All abortion is a mortal sin, and murder.

People seem to think we live in a grey world, and think the black and white is just unreasonable.

Its not, its either a sin or it isn’t.
 
GeorgeSword,

Rest assured no offence taken. However, we have reached a problem within debate as a direct result of your belief system.

You say…
“These things are not my opinions, but His Word, as well as the basic human morals infused into the soul.”

You have been instructed to believe that the ideas that you offer to the world are not to be explained, simply obeyed. Myself, as a non-beliver, Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Muslims etc - we are all your audience waiting to understand why we should follow your ideas as human beings. We are part of a mature, adult debate. We will engage with your argument.

However, you have grown up with the idea that you can pass the responsibly of explanation. You say it is “the Truth”. That you simply pass it to your particular god and no explanation is required. No interaction with the other side is required. As you put it…

" I don’t need to argue with the deaf. I am no one to tell you anything, but perhaps God is."

You are the only one to tell me anything. I do not believe any god exists so therefore it is your moral responsibilty to prove your ideas should be taken up by society.

In the modern world, this is an entirely unacceptable form of behaviour.

If you are to condem people that do not fit to your moral rules, you are morally obliged to remain in the debate and to build an argument why we should accept your ideas.

I began this thread looking at demographics. The fact that you have become a minority in many societies enforces the fact that you simply cannot refer to theology anymore. It is not accepted.

If you continue, Catholicism will simply become a cult living together, afraid of, and not partaking in the rest of the modern world. Yet, maybe that is what some Catholics desire? I truely hope it is not, and I do hope that in all future debates you will continue. As you suggest, I will reflect on some additional topics to add for debate.

🙂
 
You are correct on the demographic downshift in religious attendance amongst the Catholic Church in Europe and elsewhere. However i strongly believe, not just based on faith but from experience that the church will revive itself. Based on expreriences and studies in my own country, which is very irreligious (like europe) i find.
That generation Y as its called is actually more interested in religion then their parents. (in my country of course, if its the same in europe is beyond me)

That many more previously irreligious young people are joining the church.
Considering this i find that while the church is currently undergoing a crisis of unbelief if you will, the long term forecast is that a revival will inevitably follow it to a lesser or greater extent, the same sort of precedent applied in other crises such as the rise of Islam, and the establishment of protestantism.

This is even more likely considering that the heterodox priests acting contrary to church law will lose out in a few decades. Being replaced more orthodox priests.
Considering this the church is unlikely to face a “consistent” long term decline, particularly considering the current decline is partly because of the issues that came to the fore in vatican II. Likewise i predict that many people will eventually look into religion as they get older, which may produce a limited reconversion if you will which will have an accumulated long term consequence.

This is just in my own country mind you, but if the sitiuation is the same in europe i expect better times to come. The abundance of young families joining the church, which is consistently shown throughout many parishes here is certainly encouraging.
 
straggleyway said:
GeorgeSword,

Rest assured no offence taken. However, we have reached a problem within debate as a direct result of your belief system.

You say…
“These things are not my opinions, but His Word, as well as the basic human morals infused into the soul.”

You have been instructed to believe that the ideas that you offer to the world are not to be explained, simply obeyed. Myself, as a non-beliver, Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Muslims etc - we are all your audience waiting to understand why we should follow your ideas as human beings. We are part of a mature, adult debate. We will engage with your argument.

However, you have grown up with the idea that you can pass the responsibly of explanation. You say it is “the Truth”. That you simply pass it to your particular god and no explanation is required. No interaction with the other side is required. As you put it…

" I don’t need to argue with the deaf. I am no one to tell you anything, but perhaps God is."

You are the only one to tell me anything. I do not believe any god exists so therefore it is your moral responsibilty to prove your ideas should be taken up by society.

In the modern world, this is an entirely unacceptable form of behaviour.

If you are to condem people that do not fit to your moral rules, you are morally obliged to remain in the debate and to build an argument why we should accept your ideas.

I began this thread looking at demographics. The fact that you have become a minority in many societies enforces the fact that you simply cannot refer to theology anymore. It is not accepted.

If you continue, Catholicism will simply become a cult living together, afraid of, and not partaking in the rest of the modern world. Yet, maybe that is what some Catholics desire? I truely hope it is not, and I do hope that in all future debates you will continue. As you suggest, I will reflect on some additional topics to add for debate.

🙂
Click to expand...
As the above poster said, I expect to see the Church grow over time as those who have left return. I’m sorry I haven’t been debating theology here, but if you look at the rest of the forums, and indeed, my other posts, you’ll see that we (and I) do quite a bit of that elsewhere. I’ve just been writing down what I believe. I understand that you don’t believe this either, I’m just presenting it as I myself see it.
I am a convert to this faith myself, and believe me, I’ve done quite a bit of questioning. I believe that many others will follow me, too, as they find much of Protestant and Evangelicalism to be lacking in depth, into the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top