Topic: Why I am Catholic

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

This is not as complicated as it first appears. Consider some FACTS.  Jesus came to save us. He came because we were not perfect. His blood and his blood alone perfects us. We choose to follow him BECAUSE we know we are imperfect and NEED a Savior. 
Those of us who need a Savior are imperfect, but WE are the ones who make up the church. Therefore, the church that Jesus died for, is made up of imprefect people. People who suffer the same temptations you do. Who suffer the same failures you do. Who recognize they should have been better, but also realize they were NOT perfect. We are ONLY perfected by the blood of Christ. Obviously, we are trying. I try to do better, I promise I do. And yet, unless I remove every mirror in my home, I see, daily, an imperfect man. But, through Christ who strengthens me, I have hope, that God sees only the blood of Jesus when he looks at me. I am EXCUSED for my weakness through the blood of Christ.
The church is obviously fallible, since it is made up of fallible people. ONLY Jesus was perfect and OUR only hope of perfection is to be covered by His blood.
Please forgive me when you see my error and trust that I know them...mostly. Enough anyway to know who I am. My ONLY hope is in Christ. Let yours be there too, and not in the church. We just lean on each other as we recognize our weakness together.

[CatholicCrusader]

I was raised in the Catholic Church, from baptism through confirmation. It was a dead faith to me..............

With all due respect, thats your fault, not the Church's fault.

Is it? I attended mass every Sunday...........

Yes it is.
Its easy to go to Mass every Sunday. Its hard to pick up some books and study them. Did you ever read any REAL Catholic material when you were a Catholic? I think not,. I have almost 200 Catholic books, mostly theology, some spiritual, personal stories, etc. I know the Catholic faith in a way that I am sure you do not. I took the personal time to study and learn my faith. The faith is not learned by osmosis. Most Catholics spend more time on fixing their lawn then they do learning their faith.

Frankly, you may think that being a Catholic made you an expert in Catholicism, but it obviously did not.

No sir. The reason the faith was dead to me is because the living Christ - the Christ that is alive, and dwells in the hearts of men - was never introduced to me by those the church employed to teach me.

With all due respect, that is a lie. The living Christ is presented to all every Sunday. When we speak of Jesus every Sunday, who do you think we are talking about? The Mexican gardener nextdoor? In fact, the true BODY OF CHRIST in the Eucharist is something thast Catholics have and protestants do not. Every time you received the Eucharist, the priest said "Body of Christ", and you replied "Amen." So now you are telling us all that your "Amen" was a lie; you didn't really believe your own words. Is that correct?

[CatholicCrusader]

...Then you heard some overly simplistic idea and grabbed it. As I said, thats your fault, not the Church's fault.

This, coming from a man whose church was built upon the systematic institutional ignorance of its earliest congregants by the forbidding of education, and the obfuscation of teaching in a dead language until the 20th century.

LOL! Now you have fallen into the realm of sheer stupidity.

The Catholic Church CREATED the college system; some of the best colleges today are Catholic colleges. And as for a dead language, the reason the first Bible was in Latin, in the 4th century, is because Latin was the language of ther empire at that time. And today, most laws, legal decisions, etc., are based in Latin language. You actually use Latin every day without even thinking about it: affidavit, agenda, alma mater, alter ego, bona fide, et cetera, magna cum laude, magnum opus, mea culpa......   .....shall I go on? A dead language? These are all pure Latin words that we use every day.

No offense, but you are a moron, a simpleton who did not practice his faith, grabbed something else, and now wants to lay the blame elseweherer. You'd make a great democrat. Now, do you remember this?......

..............I have no problem being challenged on my beliefs and debating them, as long as the challenge is factual and not one of the many false allegations I have heard lo these many years.

Try to bear that in mind.

[CatholicCrusader]

This is not as complicated as it first appears. Consider some FACTS.  Jesus came to save us. He came because we were not perfect. His blood and his blood alone perfects us. We choose to follow him BECAUSE we know we are imperfect and NEED a Savior.  
Those of us who need a Savior are imperfect, but WE are the ones who make up the church. Therefore, the church that Jesus died for, is made up of imprefect people. People who suffer the same temptations you do. Who suffer the same failures you do. Who recognize they should have been better, but also realize they were NOT perfect. We are ONLY perfected by the blood of Christ...........

So far I am with you 100%

.......The church is obviously fallible, since it is made up of fallible people........

Now this is an interesting point. I agree with you basically. But consider this: The Bible is the inerrant written word of God, yet it was written by fallible sinners. How is that possible.

Simple: God prevented them from making errors when they were writing. Ergo, Infallibility is not an attribute of a man but rather a work of God.

Therefore, when Catholics speak on Conciliar Infallibility or Papal Infallibility, we do not mean that our guys are just so great that they don't make mistakes; history has proven quite the opposite. What we mean is that at certain rare points in history, God prevented any error in teaching. Now this does not mean that every priest carried out those teachings correctly, it just means that Catholic Dogma is correct because God made sure it was correct.

[CatholicCrusader]

Then you heard some overly simplistic idea and grabbed it. As I said, that is your fault, not the Church's fault.

A a matter of historical fact, the early churches and dogma of the Apostles were  simple. So simple, in fact, that no one felt the need to write down or clarify  anything for about 200 years.  I am not sure the modern complexity of a church and its teachings are  a good measure of its closeness to the original teachings of Christ.

As a matter of historical fact, you were about a foot long and drooled on yourself. Do you want to stick with that?

The Church is the Body of Christ, a living thing. Like all people do, the Church grows and learns, and anyone who thinks that the church should be as she was at her infancy is nuts.

[Weisshaupt]

As a matter of historical fact, you were about a foot long and drooled on yourself. Do you want to stick with that?

Relevance? Or was it just meant to be insulting? 

The Church is the Body of Christ, a living thing. Like all people do, the Church grows and learns, and anyone who thinks that the church should be as she was at her infancy is nuts.

 If the purpose was to grow the political power and influence of the church, elevate the clergy in the eyes of men, and in general keep non-clergy uneducated, faithful and giving tithes, then yeah, the Church "grows and learns." If the purpose of the church was to faithfully propagate the teachings of Jesus Christ,  then NO, the methods of worship and the teachings shouldn't have "evolved", been added to, or have been diminished- as Jesus didn't return to "update" his teachings. Further, we have already demonstrated at least one ecumenical council was NOT doing the work of God (by tacitly accepting the wide-spread sale of indulgences and not explicitly repudiating it) and therefore not infallible as the claim is made, and this brings all other "growth and changes" by such councils  suspect, as perhaps,  also not being inspired and guided works of God.

[CatholicCrusader]

If the purpose was to grow the political power and influence of the church, elevate the clergy in the eyes of men, and in general keep non-clergy uneducated, faithful and giving tithes, then yeah, the Church "grows and learns." .............

Gimme a break. I have never denied the sins of men. Quit throwing mud.

Your only purpose here is to argue, and I won't indulge you any more. You got a question? Ask it. Otherwise, move on. This thead is about "Why I am Catholic", not about your schoolyard attacks against the Church.

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

There is scriptural evidence to back up the inerrant word of God.  I cannot think of any scriptural evidence for the lack of error of the church. All the scriptures that come to mind are about our needs for forgiveness, and mercy, because of our sin.  There are encouragements to forgive one another, work out our disagreements, etc........but none that I know of that imply we are perfect on our own.  In fact, the letters to the Seven churches should be enough to dispel that immediately.
Rev 2:5(Written to the church at Ephesus) Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

There are similar statements to the other churches.  The church is NOT perfect, we are only perfected in the sight of Christ and we are specifically commanded to work out our OWN salvation with fear and trembling, which of course precludes leaving that to the church.
Philippians 2:12
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

It is nice that you have faith in Catholic dogma, but our faith should be based on something. Our faith in Christ DOES have a basis. We can understand and prove certain things from scripture, upon which to base our faith. But, saying the same thing about the church appears to be error, we as individuals or even as the whole, do not rise to the level of Christ.  

I do not wish to be rude at all, and I accept that you are a person of faith, trying to do what you think is right, but as I read and re-read you final comments, it really looks like you are saying: the church is always right, except when it is wrong, as we know it has been on occasion throughout history, but we can have faith that it is right on everything now.
I would come to exactly the opposite conclusion.  The fact that we KNOW it has been wrong repeatedly does not give me any faith that it is correct now.  I believe in the inerrant word of God and can place my faith in Christ by following his words to us. This seems to be the crux of the issue that we see slightly differently, but these differences may be vast in terms of working out our salvation. Can we do wrong by simply obeying scripture? I am certain we cannot.  Can we do wrong by following the teachings of men, particularly when they conflict with scripture? I am certain we can.  Given that I still come down on the supremacy of Christ and his word in any conflict.

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

2 Peter 3:17-18
King James Version (KJV)
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.


The scriptures teach us NOT to follow error, but to grow in knowledge of the word. In fact, we are to grow in the knowledge of the same words whereby we might be saved.

Acts 11:13-15
King James Version (KJV)
13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;

14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

[CatholicCrusader]

There is scriptural evidence to back up the inerrant word of God...........

LOL. A a book says its true and therefore that proves a book is true? Thats nonsense.

Yes, the Bible is the inerrant word of God, but how you arrived at that correct conclusion is nonsense.

[Weisshaupt]

If the purpose was to grow the political power and influence of the church, elevate the clergy in the eyes of men, and in general keep non-clergy uneducated, faithful and giving tithes, then yeah, the Church "grows and learns." .............

Gimme a break. I have never denied the sins of men. Quit throwing mud.

Your only purpose here is to argue, and I won't indulge you any more. You got a question? Ask it. Otherwise, move on. This thead is about "Why I am Catholic", not about your schoolyard attacks against the Church.

Its not mud throwing  to point out the truth.  It is you who refuse to respond to my points and argument regarding such.  If what I say  is not the truth, then demonstrate it with your own facts, logic and reasoning.  If you think I am behaving like a schoolyard child, then school me in my error (or not as you wish) but please don't pretend that you have done anything to address my points or to demonstrate they are wrong.

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

There is scriptural evidence to back up the inerrant word of God...........

LOL. A a book says its true and therefore that proves a book is true? Thats nonsense.

Yes, the Bible is the inerrant word of God, but how you arrived at that correct conclusion is nonsense.

I acknowledge your opinion on that and your right to hold it.  I think the FIRST test is that it CLAIMS it.  For example, Martin Luther taught a great deal, but he NEVER claimed to be inerrant, and in fact tried to get people NOT to follow him. He HATED the fact they had taken HIS name, instead of Christ's, which he knew was error. But, I do not have to test his claim to be inerrant because he never made it. There are several claims within scripture that they ARE the word of God.  I am sorry if I was unclear, since I thought this so basic and noted you are well educated in your church's doctrine, I assumed you agreed to the basics of faith in the word.  It is not the ONLY test but merely the first. If there is no claim of being the word of God there is no need to move on to other levels, such as do the prophecies come true, is it consistent with God's other words, etc..... 

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

CC, my perception is that you are becoming defensive and striking out at those you perceive as enemies. I hope this is not the case. We are NOT enemies. I am sure that you desire to serve Christ, and as such I do not wish to hinder you.  I do think some of your faith is misplaced. Christ is our hope, not the church. There is much good in the church and in fact it is a gift from God to have each other. We can encourage, help in times of need, teach, and comfort. What we cannot do is change the word of God.  And, as we examine the true tests of whether it is the church that Christ built, we need to examine if it is in conflict with his word. If it is, we are better off serving Christ and returning to HIS church. 
It is still my belief, based on scripture, that the church that Christ built is not divided. Our goal should still be to be one, just as he and the Father were one. Wasn't that his prayer for us? My opposition to denominationalism, even relatively old divisions of it, is based on scripture.  As we have looked at scripture together, it is my hope that anyone reading our conversation would be built up to serve Christ. If we let the conversation anger us and lash out with things that tear down, rather than edify, then we are not achieving something worthwhile. I think we are almost totally on the same page on most issues we have discussed. The real issue between us is where authority resides. Is it the church or is it Christ?  As you consider that question, it might be tempting to pretend there is no difference and therefore avoid the question. I would urge you not to play that game. Choose who you serve. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.  To the degree the church teaches Christ as King, perfect and crucified for our sins, I agree with them and I am part of them. When they LEAVE the teachings of Christ for their own doctrines, I have no use for them. In that moment they decided not to be the church that Christ built.  I hope you will consider those things. You may be called to be a great Christian, but do not allow yourself to be hindered by dividing yourself into being just a Catholic.

[IronDioPriest]

...With all due respect, that is a lie....Every time you received the Eucharist, the priest said "Body of Christ", and you replied "Amen." So now you are telling us all that your "Amen" was a lie; you didn't really believe your own words. Is that correct?

I'm telling you that my "Amen" was offered by rote, without any understanding of what I was saying "Amen" to.

And the lie is that crackers and grape juice are magically transformed into the body and blood of Jesus because some priest with a high probability of homosexual proclivity chants an incantation over it.

I knew intuitively that the Catholic ritual of pretending to make crackers and grape juice into Jesus was wrong, but I went along anyway. I was a kid. I can only hope that my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will forgive my youthful ignorance in blindly following pagan rituals.

See pal, I can play the insult game too. That's where you wanted this to go all along, isn't it?

...LOL! Now you have fallen into the realm of sheer stupidity.

No offense, but you are a moron, a simpleton who did not practice his faith, grabbed something else, and now wants to lay the blame elseweherer. You'd make a great democrat.

And you, sir, are a pomous, douchebag, brainwashed zealot. Now get the **** off my forum.

[Libertas]

I guess we need a spinoff thread called "Why I am not a Catholic", eh?  

ETA - If the above happens may I add this as my first entry?

http://www.france24.com/en/20121010-pope-prays-arabic-first-time

Seriously, like anybody in JihadiLand cares...I'd be much more jazzed if another round of Crusades (real Crusades, not excuses to sack your fellow Christians and expand your landholdings bullsh*t, a real "let's slaughter the infidel Muhammadan's" type Crusade!) and send those 7th century savages straight to the depths of Hell once and for all!

Have I mentioned I was born too late?  I never get what I want!         

[IronDioPriest]

I guess we need a spinoff thread called "Why I am not a Catholic", eh?  

What we really needed was someone who wouldn't start a thread called "Why I am Catholic", whose true intention was to berate others as ignorant, stupid, and Democrat-like for following a different path.

I think his intention all along was to agitate things to the point where it got out of hand. He was itching for it. Just like all zealots. They can't deal with reasoned opposition to the conclusions they've drawn personally regarding faith, and it always, always, always boils down to petty insults.

Congrats to all who tried to offer patient and respectful rebuttal. Thank you to all whose measured approach stayed my hand early on.

But in retrospect, if I had gone with my instinct and more strongly voiced my opposition or even locked the thread when my spidey-sense was tingling, this would not have spun out of control, and we may not have lost a member.

As it is, I won't have someone here who wants to call me an idiot, stupid, or moronic. If I want that kind of bullsh*t, I'll register at the Daily Kos.

Either way, he is now free to carry on his crusade wherever else he likes.

[Libertas]

I guess we need a spinoff thread called "Why I am not a Catholic", eh?  

What we really needed was someone who wouldn't start a thread called "Why I am Catholic", whose true intention was to berate others as ignorant, stupid, and Democrat-like for following a different path.

I think his intention all along was to agitate things to the point where it got out of hand. He was itching for it. Just like all zealots. They can't deal with reasoned opposition to the conclusions they've drawn personally regarding faith, and it always, always, always boils down to petty insults.

Congrats to all who tried to offer patient and respectful rebuttal. Thank you to all whose measured approach stayed my hand early on.

But in retrospect, if I had gone with my instinct and more strongly voiced my opposition or even locked the thread when my spidey-sense was tingling, this would not have spun out of control, and we may not have lost a member.

As it is, I won't have someone here who wants to call me an idiot, stupid, or moronic. If I want that kind of bullsh*t, I'll register at the Daily Kos.

Either way, he is now free to carry on his crusade wherever else he likes.

I hear ya, taking the position that the Roman Catholic Church is the preeminent Christian denomination and that all those outside of its aegis are condemned to Hell is tragic and flies in the face of who and what Jesus is.  I know too many Catholics that share that view and who I would describe as very poor Christians, not saying all are like that but they are there and they wear the same preeminence blinders.

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

IDP,

I would urge patience and forgiveness.  It is almost a certainty that he did not expect others to have the knowledge to participate in the conversation and truly he did react badly to some of the comments.  But, much of this thread has been enlightening and therefore worthwhile, at least to me. I gained understanding of Catholic doctrines that I had never understood, and though I still disagree, I am stronger for the knowledge. 

Perhaps you could be merciful here and just allow him to cool off a little rather than sending him to oblivion? You always have the option to kick him to the curb later, if patience does not produce the required results. 

The site is yours and I accept your authority over it. I am merely asking. To some degree, my continued pressing of him probably caused the irritation. And in fact, I will confess that I am a zealot for Christ. The fact is, I feel limited BY Christ, in how I  pursue that.  (In my youth I was more of a "hold 'em under til they get saved!" kind of guy. I hope I have matured and have more understanding of free will.)   

Anyway, administering the internet death penalty is up to you. I am just asking. 

[IronDioPriest]

IDP,

I would urge patience and forgiveness.  It is almost a certainty that he did not expect others to have the knowledge to participate in the conversation and truly he did react badly to some of the comments.  But, much of this thread has been enlightening and therefore worthwhile, at least to me. I gained understanding of Catholic doctrines that I had never understood, and though I still disagree, I am stronger for the knowledge.

I was reluctantly brought along by this reasoning, and did not interfere because of it. But when the guy is reduced to calling me an idiot, a moron, and like a Democrat... well. I had enough. It showed me that his intention was never to engage in a discussion, but rather to coax others into a position in which he thought he could be abusive. In other words, he was trolling, right from the start.

I appreciate your forgiving heart. I forgive him too. I just want him to crusade elsewhere.

[IronDioPriest]

Actually CHF, your appeal did not fall on deaf ears or a stone heart.

I'm lifting the ban. I would suggest that whether or not CC returns will indicate whether he finds this forum to be of value aside from his desire to ridicule others for their non-Catholic beliefs.

Either way, threads like this won't happen again. If one wishes to expound upon why their faith is meaningful to them, and even why they believe it is right, that's fine. But devolving into namecalling for the sake of sectarian divisiveness won't happen.