Runboard.com
Слава Україні!
Community logo

"‘Tonight, in the city of David, a Savior is born, 'tis Christ the Lord.'"

"There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is, of course, quite a different thing."
-Bishop Fulton J. Sheen
Placating terrorists, meeting with dictators, compassion for murderers... but no humanity for the unborn... incredible.
OOT


-->

EWTN, Global Catholic Network

runboard.com       Register for a free global account (learn about it) | Log in: (), globally (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3 ... 7  8  9  10 

 
nattyjk Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 09-2005
Posts: 445
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


quote:

The fact of the matter is there are many other religions and faiths and beliefs in the world just as plausible as Christianity, and yet somehow we are expected, within our lifetime, to choose that one.


There is ONE Truth, Lauchlin. The Catholic Church isn't the problem here, your confusion is. If you are a Christian, there is no other religion just as plausible. You are obviously looking for answers more basic than those pertaining to the practices of the Catholic Church.

quote:

You have stated that those who never hear the word of God may be forgiven for not converting, but those who have, even though they have heard so many other things, shall be condemned to Hell, shall never see heaven.


Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me. 7 If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also: and from henceforth you shall know him, and you have seen him.


quote:

You have stated that routine and ceremony are more important than the feelings within a person's heart and how they interact with the world around them, how they treat others.


And you have continuously misunderstood or simply refused to understand what we have been saying and put words into our mouths. Just a couple of posts back I explained to you how the practices of the Church are meant to more fully orient our minds and hearts toward God and help us live our Faith. A logical extension of that is translated to how one interacts in the world and treats others. As I said, all of the doctrines in the world will not save someone that does not live by them. Do you really read our posts, Lauchlin??? Feelings within a person's heart mean nothing unless they are rooted within the Truth. Feelings lead many into error all the time.

quote:

You have stated that one organization out of the many is right, and all the others 'got it wrong' even though many of the faiths alive today are older than Christianity.


Age has nothing to do with it, and if you believe that, you are in trouble in a lot of other areas of life as well. Are you going to tell me that if one lie is older than another it suddenly becomes the truth? As I said before, your questions here are obviously more basic than those pertaining to the Catholic Church. You need to start from the beginning.

quote:

I accept God's word over that of the Apostles. I accept Jesus' teachings over the ones that have taken precedence.


You do realize that not one word penned in the Bible was written by the hand of God Himself, right? Any teaching you accept from the Bible, you accept through the virtue of the person who wrote it, none of whom were Jesus Himself. This approach makes no sense.

quote:

I have tried giving different interpretations of scripture to support this, but they are never heeded. I have taken your own passages and told you how they could be interpreted, but each time, because they do not coincide with what you believe, they are either ignored or it is stated that it is different from what the church says it means, and I am therefore wrong.


Who are you to tell me what the Bible means? Where are your interpretations coming from? I can trace those I follow back to the Apostles themselves. You do me one better than that and I'll reconsider heeding your interpretations.

Even most Protestants would disagree with some of your conclusions. There are Truths which are basic to all Christian faiths, besides the Catholic Church, and you have violated even some of those.

I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
 
quote:

Your minds are closed, contrary to what you have said before, and what you may think. Closed quite firmly.


Why? Because we won't substitute the Truth with your opinion? You expect others to accept that God left us in some sort of jumbled up gray area where there is no truth but only interpretation and opinion, each as valuable and plausible as the next, which doesn't even sound like the God you yourself describe. Your post began by saying that you have to leave, and quite obviously with there still being many things you have not come to truthfully understand about the Catholic Church. You may want to consider where your own mind is in all of this, Lauchlin.

~ Natalie
   




Last edited by nattyjk, Jan/25/2007, 12:41 pm


---
Holy cow, it's a girl!!!
Jan/25/2007, 11:47 am Link to this post Send Email to nattyjk   Send PM to nattyjk
 
SHJIHM Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Devout Catholic

Registered: 07-2005
Posts: 1370
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


quote:

I accept God's word over that of the Apostles.




Wow....I can't believe I missed this. How would you know what Jesus' teachings were if not for the Apostles? It is to the Apostles whom Jesus charged with continuing His mission. And it was the Apostles who penned for us the sacred Words of our Lord. Please tell me Lauchlin that you are not reading and accepting Gnostic gospels?


---
"My Sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.


Jan/25/2007, 12:12 pm Link to this post Send Email to SHJIHM   Send PM to SHJIHM
 
Lauchlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 07-2006
Posts: 389
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


Why the quick decision to leave... why the thoughts about you folks being closed of mind... why anything?

Working from the end, back to the beginning.

Tony - I have read the Gnostic Gospels, and all I really got from them was that a bunch of people got together and decided to make up new Gospels. A rite of passage for so called official Gnostics is to write a new portion of their scripture. Again, just what I read.

The point I was trying to get across with this comment is that ceremony is an action. Yes, it is good to make people feel aligned with God in that respect. It does not work for everyone in this manner. Many people, in performing ceremonies do not realize their significance. Through this loss of realization it becomes routine, and done by rote as opposed to with thought and feeling in their heart. You have obviously not experienced this, which I am very thankful for.

Natt - In your first comment you state 'if you are a Christian'. Therein lies the problem. Another problem is that much of what you read was taken out of context, and was said in answer to other comments, meant to be rhetorical in certain instances and semi sarcastic in others - borne of frustration. My apologies to all for that.

As for plausible - methinks there is confusion on this word. Plausible, defined, is seemingly worthy of approval or acceptance - credible, believable. Which many of the other faiths are. This does not imply they are true, or that they are believed, only that they are believable. If you need help here, then your mind truly is closed. The whole idea of Faith in one idea is that a person believes regardless of the lack of physical, present evidence. All matters of faith are plausible, pure and simple.

Reference routine and ceremony, please read my comment in this entry to Tony, above.

I assure you I read your posts quite thouroughly. The problem I think I have come to understand is that when I give an alternate interpretation for much of what is said, I am told I am wrong because this is the way it is interpreted. I am not told that the interpretation is sound or not, and then given reasons why it is not the best interpretation. It seriously has felt like an alternate interpretation makes people defensive, which is what I was told I wouldn't have to worry about here...

Anyhow... as for your comment on age, reference was made to the fact that the Catholic Church can be traced back farther than my ideas, and those of the protestants as well. My comment about age was in hope that Tony would read it and think to himself "Now I see why he isn't putting much stock in the timeline thing" not as a means of advocating age over truth. Agreed, just because something is older, has been around longer, does not make it right.

Reference your comments on God not writing the Bible by hand, please do not be so infantile. I mean that as gently as I possibly can, but the fact of the matter is, the words of Christ in the Gospels seem to mean one thing, when read, and these ideas seem to conflict with the ideas of some of the rest of the New Testament. In my mind, anyhow. If I have time later, I will elucidate on that, but this is going to be long enough as it is.

You say who am I to tell you what the Bible means, but I redirect that question back to you. I am not trying to tell you what it means, I am trying to find out, aside from the fact that it is the accepted practice, why my interpretations do not make sense.

Perhaps I have spoken brashly in the past, and this has gotten much out of hand. I have been looking for guidance and reason, and it has come out, from what you say, as me toting my ideas as the supposed 'true gospel'.

Why have I seen your minds as closed of late? Perhaps in part because I am getting no actual feedback on my views, merely words telling me I am a heretic and that I am making up my own religion. I understand your anger, and I am sorry for my own. This does not change the fact that by speaking as you speak, treating my words as evil instead of trying to guide the thoughts behind them to better understanding that you appear very close minded.

Which brings us back full circle - do I wish to leave now because you do not agree with me? No, I wish to leave because I am confused and searching, trying to find more of an explanation than 'it has been done this way since the apostles, so what you say is irrelevant'. This has only added to my confusion.

In the essence of the words of the Catholic church, reference many of these matters, what I needed was in and of themselves, why are those interpretations stronger than mine. You cannot derive strength simply from the figure stating the interpretation, but instead from the word itself. A statement should stand firmly on its own, its greater meaning defensible, not by who stated it, but by what the statement of meaning itself implies.

TBC

Lauchlin
Jan/25/2007, 2:59 pm Link to this post Send Email to Lauchlin   Send PM to Lauchlin
 
AdMajoremDeiGloriam Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Cardinal

Registered: 08-2005
Posts: 1515
 | 
Misconceptions of Catholocism


"you appear very close minded. "

Or faithful emoticon

Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

"not by who stated it, "

It does not work that way

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.





Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
Jan/25/2007, 3:27 pm Link to this post Send Email to AdMajoremDeiGloriam   Send PM to AdMajoremDeiGloriam
 
Lauchlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 07-2006
Posts: 389
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


Tom - you have stated confusion at my meaning, and I wholeheartedly understand what you mean. I refer back to what I said to Tony in the post I am continuing from - I believe people, in focusing so much on the ceremonies, are losing touch with the moral lessons taught by Christ. As well, as I have mentioned and will try to elucidate on, given the time, I see inconsistencies between what Christ is quoted as saying, and what was institutionalized after his death and ressurection.

Thank you for the sentiment of wanting me to stay... what I had hoped to find here was not just Catholocism, but Christianity in general. In truth, many of my views on ceremony derive not from disrespect for the ceremonies themselves, but out of worry for the unthinking masses that simply do the ceremonies by rote, again as described above. That part has little or nothing to do with them in and of themselves. I just think that the ideas behind the ceremonies are more important than the ceremonies themselves.

Example:
Communion - Christ said, do this in rememberance of me - it is meant to remind us of the sacrifice he made to show the world what it was becoming. What he did to save us.

Confession - from what has been said here, it is meant to keep in mind that people have a link with the church as the body of Christ, and to keep in mind that there sins do not just affect them, but affect the world they are in, as well as Christ through your dedication to him.

The Mass itself - again, from what I have been told here, another means of showing people what Christ did to save us, and the importance of that sacrifice.

Yes, they are actions, ceremonies, practices, traditions meant to keep these ideas in mind - because of human nature, people lose sight of these things. Instead of seeing the ideas behind the actions, they see only the need to go through the actions to guarantee their salvation - and this makes the ceremonies lose their point.

And back to Tony...

You have spoken here, I am assuming, of my comments against papal infallibility and the infallibility of the Church itself. Please try to understand that I am not trying to say the Pope isn't necessary - I think there needs to be a candlebearer for the faith. However, I think that it is important to realize that the Pope is a man we can trust, through his service to the church and through his actions in life. Not that he is infallible as derived from heaven. He is still a man, and calling him infallible and treating him that way is raising him towards God. You have said yourself that the Pope takes the sacrament of confession, confesses his sins. If a person sins, how can they be infallible? This is what keeps confusing me : (

You say how were other faiths as plausible as Christianity - see the definition of plausibility. It is a matter of Faith. One figure sent from a man in the sky is as plausible as another - sorry to make it sound so brash, but it does sound kind of silly to argue a point like that. If you had never heard of Christ, do you think Christianity would sound any more plausible than another? If you speak of the establishment of the Church in this respect, keep in mind this is saying that it is believable because so many people do believe it, and because it is old, two points which don't work here. Keep in mind - we are talking Faith and plausibility, not Truth.

As for ceremony, I believe I have spoken enough on that in this string, and I hope that people will finally understand what I am saying... I have struggled all day to get a cool head so I can sit down and type this out, which was actually more difficult than you might think.

As for a protestant not being able to feel that, that is subjective, and frankly kind of nasty. Just because you feel a certain way, does not mean that the feelings another person has, with respect to their own faith, are any less profound. Please do not demean people so. People do not act a certain way because they wish to stray from the light - they do so because they believe themselves to be doing right. As far as all this goes, protestants do recieve communion. Perhaps the practice is different, but it is meant in the same spirit, I am fairly sure.

Your next portion focuses on my interpretations - as I stated earlier in these two posts, tell me why my interpretation doesn't work, why the one you see is better, based on the meaning of the words itself, not on who told you to belive them that way. Explain it to me. This is the reason I have been asking questions from the start. If all one can say is that another person told them, and you trust that person's judgment, then the statement itself is not very strong. I believe that the words themselves hold meaning that is defensible on its own, and doesn't need the corroboration of anyone else to tell you the interpretation is right - otherwise, you can make the words mean whatever you want.

About closed minds, please see what I wrote to Nat, as it applies here in the same way. As for Ad, I was hurt that he would use praise for you in order to insult me - it FELT quite clear that he was trying to say that I am being belligerent, and I would prefer that if he intercedes he do it directly. It seems as bad as talking behind someone's back. If he wants to be involved, get involved. Just don't act so underhanded.

I fear, greatly, that the responses to this will once again simply try to tear me down and tell me what I say is meaningless and without any foundation, but I had to try and clear things up... I just hope you don't, as I AM emotional about this, because I DO want to explore it and because I AM afraid...

What more can I say, though...

Lauchlin

Jan/25/2007, 3:32 pm Link to this post Send Email to Lauchlin   Send PM to Lauchlin
 
Lauchlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 07-2006
Posts: 389
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


Ad, you misunderstand my meaning...

You accept the word as the word of God, in the Bible. The accepted interpretations should stand on their own against any other, and should be defensible by themselves. You should not need to defend it by saying, this is the way it is because this Church figure said it is.

That is the way it is supposed to work, as otherwise you are succumbing to the fallacy of appealing to authority. It is a bias, and not a good one...

I suppose it is acceptable if you accept each Pope as infallible, but I cannot believe that, as if it were true, no evil would have been perpetrated by the church. Unknowing though it was, we know many of the horrid things that happened under church sanction. As I stated to Tony, the Pope is the candlebearer for the faith by virtue of who he is, and the trust he has shown to be worthy of, not by virtue of the post itself. Everything I have seen about what the church does tells me that it is trying to do good, and perpetuate the words of Christ, but that the person, and the organization is indeed fallible.

Sorry... this is too much typing for one day...
emoticon

Lauchlin
Jan/25/2007, 3:42 pm Link to this post Send Email to Lauchlin   Send PM to Lauchlin
 
SHJIHM Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Devout Catholic

Registered: 07-2005
Posts: 1370
 | 
Misconceptions of Catholocism


Lauchlin....a quick reply if I may as I am at work. Please understand that we can explore all facets of the faith...not agree, misunderstand each other, become a bit heated, and thru all of it, I nor anyone here wishes for you to leave. Honestly and truly my friend.

---
"My Sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.


Jan/25/2007, 3:44 pm Link to this post Send Email to SHJIHM   Send PM to SHJIHM
 
nattyjk Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 09-2005
Posts: 445
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


quote:

All matters of faith are plausible, pure and simple.


When operating from the Christian perspective that the Bible is the Word of God, without error, then no, all matters of faith are not plausible, because nothing can be possible that is contrary to God's Word. That is the point I was working from.

quote:

The problem I think I have come to understand is that when I give an alternate interpretation for much of what is said, I am told I am wrong because this is the way it is interpreted. I am not told that the interpretation is sound or not, and then given reasons why it is not the best interpretation.


This is simply not true. There have been many good, solid explanations why some of your ideas just do not work. Tom has made some excellent posts in response to yours.

quote:

Anyhow... as for your comment on age, reference was made to the fact that the Catholic Church can be traced back farther than my ideas, and those of the protestants as well. My comment about age was in hope that Tony would read it and think to himself "Now I see why he isn't putting much stock in the timeline thing" not as a means of advocating age over truth.


Well, that's good. However, you should be well aware by now that we have not simply used the age arguement for the Catholic Church. How many saints and doctors of the Church have Tony and Tom quoted that were directly taught by the Apostles themselves? The Church is traceable back to the time of Apostles, but there is much more to it than that.

quote:

Reference your comments on God not writing the Bible by hand, please do not be so infantile. I mean that as gently as I possibly can, but the fact of the matter is, the words of Christ in the Gospels seem to mean one thing, when read, and these ideas seem to conflict with the ideas of some of the rest of the New Testament.


I do not see how this assessment of the New Testament means anything in regard to my statement. The ONLY way you know what Christ's ideas were is because SOMEONE ELSE wrote them down. You say you value His words over the teachings of the Apostles. (This is assuming that there is a conflict between the two things, which I do not believe there is.) Why? How do you know that Christ actually said what He said? What are some of the conflicts you see between what He said in the gospels and the rest of the New Testament?

quote:

You say who am I to tell you what the Bible means, but I redirect that question back to you. I am not trying to tell you what it means, I am trying to find out, aside from the fact that it is the accepted practice, why my interpretations do not make sense.


That was more of an indirect question meant to illustrate a point. You have admonished us for not accepting your interpretations. I say give me a reason to accept them. For Catholics, the fact that they oppose 2,000 years worth of constant teaching suffices to reject them, but there are other practical ways in which they are unacceptable, which I believe have also been addressed.

quote:

I understand your anger, and I am sorry for my own. This does not change the fact that by speaking as you speak, treating my words as evil instead of trying to guide the thoughts behind them to better understanding that you appear very close minded.


I am not angry, Lauchlin. Just because I disagree with some of your ideas doesn't mean I am angry. I do not think your words are evil. I think this is where we get off-track, because anything that rejects your ideas is either taken as being insulting or motivated by anger. But you have to understand that when speaking to Catholics, whether you are advancing your own beliefs as truth or investigating their possibilities, we must operate from the very foundation of our Faith, which is Jesus Christ and His Church.

quote:

No, I wish to leave because I am confused and searching, trying to find more of an explanation than 'it has been done this way since the apostles, so what you say is irrelevant'. This has only added to my confusion.


It has been offered, Lauchlin. Why is the idea of listening to the people closest to Christ so confusing to you?

quote:

In the essence of the words of the Catholic church, reference many of these matters, what I needed was in and of themselves, why are those interpretations stronger than mine.


This has been offered, too, Lauchlin. The interpretations of the Church are backed up by 2,000 years worth of teachings of the Apostles and saints, unbroken since the time of Christ. I haven't seen any support for yours other than your own personal ideas, feelings, and conjecture. I need more than that, and the Catholic Church has provided it.

~ Natalie



Last edited by nattyjk, Jan/25/2007, 4:19 pm


---
Holy cow, it's a girl!!!
Jan/25/2007, 3:56 pm Link to this post Send Email to nattyjk   Send PM to nattyjk
 
tom7mot Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 09-2005
Posts: 354
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


Lauchlin:

We can have the ceremonies and the sacraments AND be true believers who hold Christ close to our hearts and show it in our lives everyday. It doesnt and shouldnt have to be one or the other.

For devout Catholics, it is BOTH.

They are of equal importance because they come from the same source: God working in and through the Catholic Church. Anyone who doesnt practice BOTH doesnt have the fullness of the faith, no matter what they call themselves. Its not impossible to do, human nature or not. I know this because I know many people who LIVE it everyday of their lives and some of them are right here on this board.

I thought we were very open-minded with you when you brought up the idea of praying for Satan and you made a good case that ended up convincing us. I also thought we were open minded when we agreed with you that there could be more than one way to read Matthew 16:18, as long as they were seen in addition to the Catholic understanding.

Its when you bring up ideas that are flat contradictions of Catholic teaching that you will be told you are wrong and why you are wrong. A lot of thought has gone into Catholic beliefs over the centuries and by men who were much smarter than you and I. Some of the objections you raise to Catholicism are as old as the Catholic Church itself - and so are the answers to those objections.

The ceremonies and sacraments arent meant to keep things 'in mind'. They are meant to be LIVED. When you go to confession, you are LIVING the faith and preparing to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. When you are baptized, you are LIVING the faith and preparing to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. When you are confirmed, you are LIVING the faith and strengthening your resolve to receive Jesus in the Eucharist. Do you see a trend here? The ceremonies and sacraments are LIVING the faith because they bring us to Jesus! Thats the WHOLE POINT of all those ceremonies: JESUS. The sacraments ARE JESUS.

Anyway, I agree with Tony and hope you will stick around.



Last edited by tom7mot, Jan/25/2007, 5:25 pm
Jan/25/2007, 5:20 pm Link to this post Send Email to tom7mot   Send PM to tom7mot
 
Lauchlin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Newbie

Registered: 07-2006
Posts: 389
 | 
Re: Misconceptions of Catholocism


As Jesus, though I cannot hope to approach what he accomplished, I am not worried about the faithful and the constant. I am worried about the wayward and the complacent - those who simply go through the motions... yes, for Devout Catholics it IS both - not for the ones that have lost their focus. Not realizing and dealing with that fact is a travesty against them, and against care IMHO...

The sacraments seem more like procedures meant to make us feel close to Jesus.

Either way, to be lived you have to have a broader focus than the motion, wouldn't you agree?

Nat, I understand what you mean about the Christian Perspective, but I guess I am not and never will be a true believe in the way you see it. I guess my view is that the Bible is a tool and a testament to what was seen. It was word of God passed through perception of man, and is thus flawed in my opinion. Thank you for your input, and also for helping me solidify this in my mind.

As well, I believe I mentioned over and over again how appealing to the Church fathers for interpretation does not work for me. I was hoping for something about the idea of the word itself, not about who stated it.

Yes, it is hard for me to see the Bible as the pure word of Christ, where it is stated. It was part of the entire struggle I was undergoing.

Again, thank you for helping me make this solid in my mind. It would seem I have come to the conclusion that I shall try and follow Christ's example, but I cannot follow the organization that has followed in his name. I know that no one here can agree with this, and will likely think or state that it is impossible to do as such without following the faith.

Trying to live as Christ recommended, morally, does not have to be tied up in religion, though. I can only hope that He will understand and forgive me if I am wrong to do so, as I am sure you all believe it to be.

http://skeptically.org/bible/id6.html

Sorry to have wasted your time.
Lauchlin

Last edited by Lauchlin, Jan/25/2007, 10:06 pm
Jan/25/2007, 8:12 pm Link to this post Send Email to Lauchlin   Send PM to Lauchlin
 


Post new topic

Page:  1  2  3 ... 7  8  9  10 





You are not logged in (login)
Christmas countdown banner

Easter countdown banner

This is the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Happy are those who are called to His supper.
The Bread of Life Catholic Webring
[ Join Now | List | Next 5 | << Prev | Next >> ]

Previous Next Index Random

This RingSurf

Sacred Heart of Jesus

Net Ring owned by
SHJIHM.


Random Site | List Sites | JOIN

The Sacred Heart of Jesus
Power By Ringsurf
Christian Banner Exchanger Webring
Power By Ringsurf

This

Blessed Virgin Mary Ring

owned by
SHJIHM



[ Join | Previous | Next | Skip Previous ] [ Skip Next | Next 5 Sites | Previous 5 Sites | List Sites ]