It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Faith & Family => Topic started by: CatholicCrusader on September 01, 2011, 01:23:23 PM
-
>>>>
A shameless plug I know, but a great video:
"Epic :120" Catholics Come Home (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs6qZd_xP1w#)
-
That's a nice video. I was raised Catholic, and left the church behind upon confirmation. It wasn't until I felt the pull of Holy Spirit around the time I turned 40, that I began to seek God again. Instead of Catholicism, I sought out a non-denominational evangelical church, and re-ignited my relationship with God.
Many of the reasons I left Catholicism behind are still there. I have an inherent suspicion of man-made constructs, and am only interested in what the Bible says about God. I found much of Catholicism to be man-made construct, so I threw the baby out with the bathwater, so-to-speak, and left God behind altogether.
But I've found that my remedy for man-made constructs was not in the evangelical church either. I've discovered that for all their talk about a relationship with Jesus, a man-made construct is a man-made construct. I'm wondering if perhaps there is no way to be involved in an organized church without the taint of man; his lust for power; gossip; control; pride, etc.
So my view on the Catholic church has changed again. I'm not ready to sign-up or anything, but I've regained a healthy respect for the endurance of the institution, and the reverence for God inherent in its traditions and doctrine. I believe it is a man-made construct, but if all churches are, and I cannot escape that reality, then it is upon me to decide with which man-made construct - if any - I will align. I may just have to have my relationship with the living Christ within the confines of a man-made construct! And the Catholic church is not out of the question for me any longer.
There is an awfully impressive list of historic accomplishments listed in that video. To pick one:
[blockquote]"We are the largest charitable organization on the planet."[/blockquote]
Without question, an undeniable truth.
-
Name one thing you think is a man-made construct. Not a bunch, just one, of your choice.
-
Name one thing you think is a man-made construct. Not a bunch, just one, of your choice.
Nah, it's OK. I don't want to get into a debate with you over the merits of Catholic doctrine, because I have no interest in saying anything that would make you feel like I don't respect your faith, because I do.
So no, I'd rather not go there... unless you insist.
-
Name one thing you think is a man-made construct. Not a bunch, just one, of your choice.
Nah, it's OK. I don't want to get into a debate with you over the merits of Catholic doctrine, because I have no interest in saying anything that would make you feel like I don't respect your faith, because I do.
So no, I'd rather not go there... unless you insist.
Nope, that's okay.
But if you ever want the other side, this is a pretty neat booklet: http://www.catholic.com/library/pillar.asp (http://www.catholic.com/library/pillar.asp)
::thumbsup::
-
There's nothing wrong with the Booze and Bingo Catholic faith. Besides, we have great guilt trips (equal to or greater than Jewish guilt trips), rosaries and Stations of the Cross, with lots of kneeling. Not to mention nuns beating the crap out of you. Oh yeah, and crucifixes, not just empty crosses; there's a lesson in pain crucifixes provide as the prior sentence proves. And for communion, actual wine is used (unlike those heathen Methodists who use grape juice; that Jesus is a great guy to have as a wedding guest). And the best chorales around. Nothing like a high Mass for music fans. Plus incense. Lots of incense.
There's something soothing and comforting about formal rituals.
/Former altar boy.
-
There's nothing wrong with the Booze and Bingo Catholic faith. Besides, we have great guilt trips (equal to or greater than Jewish guilt trips), rosaries and Stations of the Cross, with lots of kneeling. Not to mention nuns beating the crap out of you. Oh yeah, and crucifixes, not just empty crosses; there's a lesson in pain crucifixes provide as the prior sentence proves. And for communion, actual wine is used (unlike those heathen Methodists who use grape juice; that Jesus is a great guy to have as a wedding guest). And the best chorales around. Nothing like a high Mass for music fans. Plus incense. Lots of incense.
There's something soothing and comforting about formal rituals.
/Former altar boy.
::rolllaughing::
As if it didn't show ......
-
/Former altar boy.
::rolllaughing::
As if it didn't show ......
Now, now. I even earned the Boy Scouts' Catholic religious award, the Ad Altari Dei medal ('to the altar of God'); they had religious medals for pretty much all faiths, but you usually had to seek out a sponsor/signer offerer, someone in authority with whom my Scout leader would have no problem. It was easy to get back then, but I doubt I'd be able to get it today.
-
That's a nice video. I was raised Catholic, and left the church behind upon confirmation. It wasn't until I felt the pull of Holy Spirit around the time I turned 40, that I began to seek God again. Instead of Catholicism, I sought out a non-denominational evangelical church, and re-ignited my relationship with God.
Many of the reasons I left Catholicism behind are still there. I have an inherent suspicion of man-made constructs, and am only interested in what the Bible says about God. I found much of Catholicism to be man-made construct, so I threw the baby out with the bathwater, so-to-speak, and left God behind altogether.
But I've found that my remedy for man-made constructs was not in the evangelical church either. I've discovered that for all their talk about a relationship with Jesus, a man-made construct is a man-made construct. I'm wondering if perhaps there is no way to be involved in an organized church without the taint of man; his lust for power; gossip; control; pride, etc.
So my view on the Catholic church has changed again. I'm not ready to sign-up or anything, but I've regained a healthy respect for the endurance of the institution, and the reverence for God inherent in its traditions and doctrine. I believe it is a man-made construct, but if all churches are, and I cannot escape that reality, then it is upon me to decide with which man-made construct - if any - I will align. I may just have to have my relationship with the living Christ within the confines of a man-made construct! And the Catholic church is not out of the question for me any longer.
There is an awfully impressive list of historic accomplishments listed in that video. To pick one:
[blockquote]"We are the largest charitable organization on the planet."[/blockquote]
Without question, an undeniable truth.
Well said.
This or similar to this (not Catholic) is where I and I think many others are. People are repulsed by their Denomination bending to the world in eager disobedience to the Word and drift in search of that gathering
of two or more in genuine fellowship.
I don't like dogma; to obey the Word is dogmatic.
-
I don't like dogma; to obey the Word is dogmatic.
'Eh? Charles. What?
-
Is it not dogmatic to obey the Word?
-
Is it not dogmatic to obey the Word?
The Word of God is dogma? ::thinking::
-
dogma -
noun a doctrine or code of beliefs accepted as authoritative; "he believed all the Marxist dogma"
noun a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
see also; tenet
In matters of faith, dogma is not a bad word, to be dogmatic without faith...
-
I've always thought the Word stands as truth, and that the biblically-derived rites, rituals, traditions, doctrine, and demands of organized religion was the dogma.
For instance, I've always considered the transformation of wafers into the body of Christ to be dogma. It is found nowhere in the bible that a metaphysical transformation took place when Christ served holy communion, and nowhere that it is to be done as ritual by a church.
To equally criticize non-Catholic dogma, it is written nowhere in the bible that we are to babble incoherently and believe that somehow we are "speaking in tongues".
But is the 10 Commandments "dogma"? I guess I don't know the answer. I've just always separated the biblical from the non-biblical in relation to dogma.
But maybe there is no line of separation.
-
That's the dilemma. We are not to put ourselves before God (we are to follow) and who are we to say which part of the Bible is "man-made" and which is a lesson from God?
-
>>>>
Okay okay, education time:
A "doctrine" is a teaching. Very simple.
A "dogma" (in Catholicism) is a doctrine that has been infallibly defined.
-
It's that whole infallible thingy that I have issues with.
::thinking::
-
It's that whole infallible thingy that I have issues with.
::thinking::
Consider this: The Bible is the Word of God, right? Yet men wrote it. How could fallible men write the infallible Word of God?
Men wrote the Bible under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The ultimate author of the Bible is the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit worked through men. Therefore, while those men had pen to paper, God was holding them infallible. That is is pretty obvious, and we therefore have an historic precedent.
God made fallible men infallible, if only temporarilly, so that they could write the scriptures without error. It is the same with the pope. Infallibility is not an attribute of the man, but rather an act of God. It might interest you to know that a pope has only made two infallible doctrinal statements in the last 100 years. This is not some common occurance.
-
The word of God is perfect, but man's interpretation/translation is not necessarily so. That is why we have different denominations of Christianity. We can't all agree because we are imperfect, including the pope.
It's not the infallible part that bothers me. It's the "we are the only ones who have it right"' attitude of so many Christian sects. I don't beleve ANY of them have interpreted the entire bible accurately, and that's why I have a serious problem with ALL "organized religion."
My two cents....
-
I respect that point of view CC, but I think that one can hold the the Word of God is divinely inspired, but simultaneously hold that what men have done with that Word is about as chaotic as the human experience. Many things done in the name of that Word are divinely inspired, and many things are not. In the end, men will disagree as to what deeds and doctrines belong on which list; inspired, or not inspired by God.
My opinion is that the Word is holy and divinely inspired, but interpretation of it may or may not be.
-
The word of God is perfect, but man's interpretation/translation is not necessarily so. That is why we have different denominations of Christianity. We can't all agree because we are imperfect, including the pope.
That is an excellent observatrion, and it actually fits right in with my outlook.
Yes, when people interpret the Bible on their own they come up with different stuff, and thus we have denominations. But that is because men started to rely on their own interpretations instead of that of the Church, which was established by Christ to "teach".
The Pope is not perfect: I would never say otherwise. Peter was not perfect either. In fact, he was quite the sinner. Yet he was infallible when he wrote 1 Peter and 2 Peter. See what I mean? When God deemed it neccessary, He prevented Peter from making an error when Peter wrote his epistles.
That is the essence of infallibility from a Catholic POV: Being prevented by God from making an error at a particular point in time.
It's not the infallible part that bothers me. It's the "we are the only ones who have it right"' attitude of so many Christian sects. I don't beleve ANY of them have interpreted the entire bible accurately, and that's why I have a serious problem with ALL "organized religion."
My two cents....
"Organized religion" is a derogatory modern catch-phrase. In fact, God "organized" the Israelites, with father Abraham, then the fathers of the 12 Tribes, the judges, etc.
And based on this model, Christ’s Church was is also hierarchical. He chose 12 apostles, made Peter the leader, and gave them authorities that all the other disciples did not have. Later, in Acts, the hierarchy develops further. The apostles appoint Deacons (greek - diakonos ), Priests (greek - presbyteros ), and Bishops (greek - episkopos), and each have different duties. It is the same today in the Catholic Church