Posted on 05/03/2002 6:47:29 PM PDT by ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton
... Led the American Bishops into Error, and How that Contributed to Problems in the American Catholic Church First of all, let me say that for most of my life, I was either non-Catholic or anti-Catholic so I never blindly followed the Teachings of the Catholic Church.
Later on in my life I realized that the Churches claim to be a least as old as the Orthodox Church, and yet to be not based on a single Nationality, but have Universal membership, made me decide to take a closer look at the Churches teachings.
After several years of study regarding the Churches view on it’s unique aspects such as the role of the Pope, the Communion of Saints, Marian Theology, the Sacraments, Purgatory, and Apostolic Secession, I decided that not only was the churches teachings sound, they were convincing.
I have been a convert to the Faith since I was 35 years old, which is slightly over a decade. My wife and my children also joined me in this journey.
One of the first things I noticed was that the Catholic idea Heaven is that not everyone is the same in Heaven. Where as a Protestant I believed that on death I would be dancing in the street with the Lord, the Catholic’s believe that only the highest angels the Seraphim gaze constantly at God’s face.
In Catholicism, you are rewarded to varying degrees for what you do. This idea is not without foundation in the bible, the idea being to save up for treasure in heaven. As there are various levels of rewards, so to are there varying levels of sin.
The idea of mortal vs. venial sin is based on Paul’s teaching in Thessalonians. Think of it in terms of your physical body. All injuries hurt you, but not all injuries kill you. But by the same token, you wouldn’t cut off your hand and use the argument: “Well, I knew it wouldn’t kill me. I know I wouldn’t die, just bleed a lot.”
Where the American Bishops have gone wrong is this, their idea is that: “Well, some priests have heterosexual tendencies and some have homosexual tendencies. That is not important. What is important is that to not act on those tendencies, which would be a sin.”
This is exactly the kind of moral equivalency that seems to be the assumption of the entire media/news complex and the entertainment fields. In fact Seinfield based a show on the idea of: “Not that there is anything wrong with that”.
The American Bishops view ignores the fact that there are profound differences between those with homosexual tendencies and those without them.
The incidence of mental disorders, of suicide, of mental breakdowns of depression, of drug use is much higher among gays than straights in our society. In fact, from the viewpoint of life expectancy, being gay statistically shortens a person’s life more than smoking two packs of cigarettes a day.
Also from a moral standpoint there is evidence that they are not the same as well. In the Old Testament Lott offered his degenerate neighbors his virgin daughters to spare them the sin of unnatural sex with the angels.
In conclusion, the error of liberalism has infected our society with moral equivalence, and even the Bishops are not immune from it. It would appear that the American Bishops have not yet learned the lesson of Bill Clinton, Morality does Matter!
Perhaps I'm wrong, but doesn't the Bible say, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
I seem to also remember the Prophet Isaiah saying, "All your righteousnesses are as dirty rags."
My studies of the Scripture lead me to believe that we do good because we love God, not because we want something for ourselves.
the Catholic's believe that only the highest angels the Seraphim gaze constantly at God's face.
Then why would Paul tell us to go bodly into the Most Holy Place?
As a 'revert', (I left the Catholic Church in my 20's and returned as my children began to grow) I appreciate your level of commitment.
To a degree, I agree with your analysis of the American Bishops. Personally, I think that the problem resides at a higher level.
Let me ask a plain question, who appointed all the American Cardinals and most of the Bishops? Does he have any culpability?
Who approved of Communion in the hand, radical 'inculturation', Alter girls?
Who reinterpreted traditional teachings on Capital punishment, while not outright rejecting the teaching and may now be flirting with outright pacifism?
Who seemingly turns a blind eye to the attacks on Christians and Holy Sites by the 'Palestinians' and Islamists, while seeming to frequently ignore the homicidal attacks on Christians And Israeli civilians?
Who is a great supporter of the EU and the UN?
Food for thought....
Sursum Corda
Thane, I have read with interest on this forum that the other churches do not believe you have to do good works to get to Heaven. I never knew that before!
I recall there being something in the Bible about Jesus saying something like; "In my house, there are many Mansions [sp]". I understand that to mean; elevations.
How can a hermit, living in the wilderness, commiting no sins, be the equal of Mother Theresa?
Because when God looks at each saved person, he sees Christ rather than that saved person. We are clothed in Christ's righteousness, and therefore equal before God. Clearly Mother Theresa is of more value to the starving than a hermit, but in the eyes of God, both are wretched sinners until they take up the righteousness of Christ.
The Bible is very clear that works cannot get one to heaven. Even the Catholic Church officially adopts this stance to a degree. The second one commits a single sin, one is damned. But when one accepts Christ, all the sins are blotted out (Acts 3:19). If even one sin condemns a man, ther e is no point in doing good things to cover up one's sins.
As Paul wrote in Ephesians, we are saved by grace through faith and never by works. Paul further echoes this in Galatians, Romans, and other books. John further makes this point in John I.
The only problem one finds with salvation free of works is in James. However, most interpretations of James's statement that "faith without works is dead" are that the author meant if we say we have faith, yet don't act like we have faith, we really don't have faith and we're as hypocritical as liberal Democrats. Works are the fruits of faith, never the means to salvation.
I recall there being something in the Bible about Jesus saying something like; "In my house, there are many Mansions [sp]". I understand that to mean; elevations.
I always interpreted it to mean many places to live, meaning many people will be there. Christ said, "I go to prepare a place for you." This would tend to mean he was talking about domiciles, not elevations.
Indeed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.