The Big Discovery [by David, former Presbyterian]

Journeyof ImperfectSaint.blogspot.com ^ | October 4, 2009 | David

[Salvation]

Sunday, October 4, 2009

The Big Discovery

        I made some good friends outside my church and found out that they were all Catholics.  Now, I did not know much about Catholicism at the time.  By the way, the Mass did seem somewhat mysterious to me externally.  In fact, what little I had heard from other church members was all negative.  There was a Mrs. J at my church, who had just retired from her missionary post in China.  She was such a kind and endearing soul to all.  One day she got back from visiting someone at a hospital and looked extremely sad and disturbed.  It turned out that when she got to the hospital room, she saw that a Catholic priest was already there with the patient.  Now the question was if the patient would ever get to heaven. 

 

        Nevertheless, my Catholic friends all looked quite normal and happy.  Then could the Catholic Church, the largest church in the the world, be in error?  It so happened that at that time I was also beginning to question my Protestant faith.  The fact that there were numerous different denominations around the world bothered me.  Also, as a Protestant, whether you're a minister or lay person, you are free to marry and divorce any number of times.  It's hard to see that Jesus would be happy with these two facts.  Since I am the kind of person who always likes to find the answer to any question that's important, I decided to look into Catholicism.

 

        I made up my mind not to talk to anyone about my investigation.  I was single then and had a lot of free time to myself.  The local public library housed an excellent collection of books on Catholicism, so I started borrowing books on the subject.  I read every weekend, even taking notes as I read.  The went on for over a year.  I read all those books that viciously attack the Catholic Church too, but somehow they did not affect me much because I sensed that these attacks could not have been prompted by the Holy Spirit.  The books that really helped me were the ones on early Church history.  I could see that the continuity was there and the beliefs and practices of the early Church had been preserved to this day in the Catholic Church.  The only conclusion I could come to was that the Catholic Church was indeed the church Jesus had come and established.  Like Christ himself, the Church, being his body, must be accepted (or rejected) totally, with no middle ground. 

 

        Here's some advice for those who seek the truth.  Your chances of success will greatly improve if, first, you start out with a completely open mind and secondly, go to the source(s) directly to get the facts.  Many who misunderstand the Catholic Church today have already made up their mind that the Church is wrong, thus never bothering to pick up a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to find out what the Church really teaches.  This is being close-minded. 

[metmom]

I really don't care what her experiences have been. What she heard is not true.

You can't say that!

I didn't hear ABOUT RC's not considering UC's legit, I heard them SAY IT themselves.

I saw and heard the attitudes and words myself from the RC's themselves.

Can you not understand the difference between hearing about something and hearing it personally?

So you think that when I heard the RC's disparaging the UC's it wasn't true? Do tell. How does that work?

[Titanites]

I see that you had to call in the posse. I don't know if you've put on your moderator pants or something, but you've come into the discussion late swinging your elbows and making false accusations. Maybe you need to go sit down and cool off for a bit.

Well, since she was talking about her experiences, then you have shown that truth is a relative term for you.

No, the truth is not relative. She has made claims that are not true:

So much for unity within Catholicism.

Roman Catholics don't consider Ukrainian Catholics quite good enough and the Ukrainian Catholics know it.

Roman Catholics didn’t consider them *real* Catholics.

Why not admit that you cannot possibly know what someone else has heard and seen among their own relatives and leave it at that?

Because the claims she's making based on some conversation she may or may not have had are not true.

It appears that, even with the added links about experiences of OTHER Ukrainian Catholics, like I said, some people cannot tolerate ANY negative criticism about their church

Fair criticism is tolerated. But I won't sit by letting you or anyone else make untrue claims about the Church. I'm sorry that bothers you, but that's the way it is.

As long as you keep it up, you only continue to prove it.

As long as I defend the Church against untrue claims, I only prove that I am not going to tolerate it.

The Ukrainian Greek Catholics are in full communion with the Church and the Pope. They are fully accepted. That's the truth, and if that bothers you and your posse, I can't help that.

[Titanites]

You can't say that!

Yes, I can. You claimed that Roman Catholics don't consider Ukrainian Catholics quite good enough. You've presented nothing but hearsay and rumor. I've shown you the actual position of the Church, and the views of Catholic laity.

So you think that when I heard the RC's disparaging the UC's it wasn't true?

What you presented as evidence is nothing but hearsay and rumor. What you may or may not have heard is not true - Ukrainian Greek Catholics, are Catholic. Contrary to what you posted, they are in unity with the Church.

How does that work?

Not very well for you.

[Titanites]

Why not just drop it?

You guys are the ones keeping it going, and I'm happy to oblige.

[boatbums]

I see that you had to call in the posse. I don't know if you've put on your moderator pants or something, but you've come into the discussion late swinging your elbows and making false accusations. Maybe you need to go sit down and cool off for a bit.

My "posse"? LOL! I only pinged them because they had already posted comments to this thread that addressed the historic discord that DOES exist between SOME UCs and RCs. You can choose to ignore them, but they are what they are. The only reason I have entered the discussion is because Metmom is a FRiend and she has NO reason to lie about her experiences - NONE! If I kept on and kept on nagging and harassing one of your fellow FReeper Catholics for stupid reasons, I doubt very much you would go sit in the corner and cool off. And here's a newsflash for you....you aren't "defending the Church against untrue claims", you are giving an all-too-familiar knee jerk reaction to anything that can be construed as negative about your church. It couldn't be plainer. It's one thing to state a dogma of the church incorrectly but it's entirely different when someone who WAS a Catholic talks about their experiences with Catholics in their own life. I don't know what it will take for you to understand this point, but I'm done trying to help you.

[daniel1212]

Thanks. Chernobyl-what a tragedy, including in how it was handled.

[Titanites]

And here's a newsflash for you....you aren't "defending the Church against untrue claims", you are giving an all-too-familiar knee jerk reaction to anything that can be construed as negative about your church.

Here's a new flash for you:

The claim that the UKGCC is not in unity with the Catholic Church is not true.

The claim that the UKGCC is considered not good enough to be Catholic is not true.

The claim that Catholics don't consider the UKGCC to be real Catholics is not true.

If want to label my pointing out that those claims are not true an "all-too-familiar knee jerk reaction," I can't help that. When I see false claims being made about the Church, I will respond. If that hurts your feelings, maybe you should stay on the ecumenical or caucus threads.

I'm done trying to help you.

LOL. Thanks.

[metmom]

The claim that the UKGCC is not in unity with the Catholic Church is not true.

Who made that claim?

The claim that the UKGCC is considered not good enough to be Catholic is not true.

Who made that claim as well?

The claim that Catholics don't consider the UKGCC to be real Catholics is not true.

You can't know that unless you've personally asked every single Roman Catholic on the planet. Did you?

[Titanites]

The claim that the UKGCC is not in unity with the Catholic Church is not true.

Who made that claim?

You did in 353.

The claim that the UKGCC is considered not good enough to be Catholic is not true.

Who made that claim as well?

You did in 403.

You can't know that unless you've personally asked every single Roman Catholic on the planet. Did you? You can't know that unless you've personally asked every single Roman Catholic on the planet. Did you?

Catholics do consider the Ukrainian Greek Catholics to be real Catholics.

[Titanites]

And you ask me to just drop it. LOL.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

a few comments in response:

1. re: mocking derision. when i see storm clouds gathering, i know it’s going to rain. when i hear someone say abraham lincoln was the first president of the us, i know they don’t know american history. and sadly, when i read someone say Irenaeus didn’t practice infant baptism, i know i am dealing with someone who doesn’t know Church history. here is the quote for anyone who didn’t read my prior post:
“He came to save all through Himself; all, i say, who through Him are reborn in God: INFANTS, and children and yoths.....” ( my emphasis ) Irenaeus learned the faith from Polycarp, who learned from John. Ireneaus taught Hippolytus, who said infant baptism was taught by the Apostles. does anyone think Polycarp didn’t know if the Apostle John baptized infants? does anyone think Ireneaus didn’t know what Polycarp though of infant baptism? was Hippolytus dreaming, when after learning the faith from Irenaeus, he wrote “the apostolic tradition” in 215ad and said infant baptism was from the Apostles?
2.”our common ancestors in the faith” i see this thinking a lot. for someone to be your “common ancestor”, you need to hold the same “common faith” the church fathers believed in baptismal regeneration, do you? they believed in infant baptism, do you? they believed in the Catholic Church, do you? they believed in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, do you? i could go on, but i think my point is made. how could they be your common ancestor in faith if you would not have worshipped with them and they wouldn’t give you the Eucharist even if you did worship with them since you deny it is the Body of Christ?
3. infant baptism is a minor issue, REALLY??? you should have told the Baptists that, they seemed to have caused a lot of trouble in the 16th century over a “minor issue”
4. the core of the problem is a complete misunderstanding of what baptism is. baptism is for the remission of sins, receiving the Holy Spirit and placing us “into Christ”. no one was ever told to be baptized as an “outward testimony” ( please provide Scripture for this assertion ) or to be obedient ( again, Scripture please ) as i proved previously these are 16th century inventions. John, Polycarp, Ireneaus and Hippolytus all believed in the Catholic doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
5.” i don’t dispute the concept developed....” translation, i hope it developed, because if it didn’t, i have a different Gospel than traditional, historical Christianity. what is the proof of this “development”? THERE IS NONE. History shows the Catholic Church dealt with many heresies in the 1st four centuries after Christ, but there is NO RECORD of any “bible christians” who opposed the Catholics in this regard. WHY NOT, WHERE WERE THEY? again, imagine the controversy that would ensue if one day a local parish was practicing “believers baptism” and then the next day the priest was baptizing a baby!!
5. “it is not the act that saves us” who are we to believe in this regard you or the Holy Spirit who thru Peter, tells us baptism does save us? Baptism is not done by us, it is not a “work” Baptism is done TO US, by the Holy Spirit, through the Body of Christ on earth, the Church.
6. “ i follow His teachings as laid out in Holy Scripture”
REALLY? Jesus prayed in John 17 that His followers be One, as a testimony to the world. Do you follow Your Lord in this regard or do you seperate yourself from His Church and contribute to the religious confusion and make all kinds of accusations against the Church? Paul exhorts the Corinthians to be One and not have any dissention. Do you follow Paul in this regard? Many will say Lord, Lord, and think they were being obedient, but they are really in rebellion against the Lord.

Finally, i wish to comment on this whole notion of former Catholics and alleged former Catholics being attacked on FR for disagreeing with Catholic doctrine. Speaking for myself, i have no problem with anyone disagreeing with the Church on anything IF THEY CORRECTLY STATE THE TRUE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE. I can’t think of one “former” or alleged former Catholic who has ever correctly stated the Catholic doctrine, never. so i will read Catholics worship Mary, bread, statues, Catholics aren’t allowed to read the Bible, Catholics believe we are saved by works, Catholics think the Pope is perfect, Catholics think we will be God, etc etc. If i ever read a former Catholic correctly state Catholic doctrine, i think i would pass out!! i would feel they would deserve a prize! But then i realize that if they really did understand Catholic doctrine, they would still be Catholic! so i for one, will continue to expose the phony former Catholics who obviously learned what they know about the Faith from someone who they themselves have no clue or a comic book tract of some kind.
but i love the discussion, because i believe someone is going to actually look up Irenaeus and see what this defender of the faith in the second century actually believed ( and that’s a very good thing for Christ and His Church! )

[metmom]

I didn't say that the RCC doesn't consider the UCC in unity with them.

I said that the RC's and the UC's don't consider each other *real* Catholics. It isn't a matter of the official church position being that of unity, it's a matter of the lay Catholics who are not unified.

Do try some reading comprehension lessons.

Catholics do consider the Ukrainian Greek Catholics to be real Catholics.

Maybe the ones YOU know. It's not an opinion that is universally held.

[metmom]

ooops, try again.....

I didn't say that the RCC doesn't consider the UCC in unity with them.

I said that the RC's and the UC's don't consider each other *real* Catholics. It isn't a matter of the official church position being that of unity, it's a matter of the lay Catholics who are not unified.

Do try some reading comprehension lessons.

Catholics do consider the Ukrainian Greek Catholics to be real Catholics.

Maybe the ones YOU know. It's not an opinion that is universally held.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

how does your line of thinking here work in 1 Corinthians 1:16? can you prove from the Scripturs that there were no babies or infants in the household of Steph’anas?

oh, do you have any Scripture that support “ the scriptures forbid the baptizing of babies”

[Salvation]

There are seven major Catholic Churches -- Have you never read this thread? THE RITES OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH -- There are many!

RITE	CHURCHES THAT USE THIS RITE	ORIGINAL LITURGICAL LANGUAGE	PATRIARCH	POINT OF ORIGIN
1.ROMAN	All Roman Catholics	Latin	Bishop of Rome	Rome
MOZARABIC	Archdiocese of Toledo Spain	Latin	Bishop of Rome	Spain
AMBROSIAN	Archdiocese of Milan, Italy	Latin	Bishop of Rome	Milan
BRAGAN	Archdiocese of Braga, Portugal	Latin	Bishop of Rome	Braga
DOMINICAN	Dominican Priests	Latin	Bishop of Rome	St. Dominic
CARMELITE	Carmelite Priests	Latin	Bishop of Rome	St. Berthold
CARTHUSIANS	Carthusian Priests	Latin	Bishop of Rome	St. Bruno
2. BYZANTINE	Belarussian	Old Slavonic		Belarussia
	Bulgarian	Old Slavonic	Apostolic Exarch for Catholics of the Byzantine-Slav rite in Bulgaria	Bulgaria
	Croatian	Old Slavonic	Bishop of Kricevci	Croatia
	Greek	Greek	Apostolic Exarch for Catholics of the Byzantine rite in Greece	Greece
	Hungarian	Greek	Bishop of Hajdudorog, Apostolic Administrator of Miskolc	Hungary
	Italo-Albanian	Greek	Local Latin Bishop	Italy
	Melkite	Greek	Melkite Greek Patriarch of Damascus	Syria/Lebanon/Israel
	Romanian	Romanian	Archbishop of Fagaras and Alba Julia	Romania
	Russian	Old Slavonic	Apostolic Exarch in Russia	Russia
	Ruthenian	Old Slavonic	Bishop of Mukacevo of the Byzantines	Ukrania
	Slovakian	Old Slavonic	Bishop of Presov of Catholics of the Byzantine rite	Slovakia
	Ukrainian	Old Slavonic	Major Archbishop of Lviv of the Ukranians	Ukrania
3.ALEXANDRIAN	Coptic	Coptic	Patriarch of Alexandria of the Copts	Egypt
	Ethiopian	Ge'ez	Archbishop of Addis Ababa of the Ethiopians	Ethiopia/Somalia
4. SYRIAC	Syriac		Syriac Patriarch of Antioch	Syria
	Malankarese	West Syriac	Metropolitan of Trivandrum of the Syro-Malankarese	India
5. ARMENIAN	Armenian	Classical Armenian	Patriarch of Cilicia of the Armenians	Armenia
6. MARONITE	Maronite	Aramaic	Maronite Patriarch of Antioch	Lebanon
7. CHALDEAN	Chaldean	Syriac	Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans	Iraq
	Malabar	Syriac	Major Archbishop of the Malabar rite	India

Published by The Minnesota St. Thomas More Chapter of Catholics United for the Faith, March/April 2000.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

It is, however Jesus’ illustration of the wheat and weeds foretold a longtime from beginning to end of it’s fulfillment

that’s the difference between us, Catholics know the Church is the Body of Christ on earth, protected by the Holy Spirit and is the pillar of truth.
others believe it is man made organization like the moose club. it’s a shame.

[Salvation]

Sorry I forgot to ping you.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2891087/posts?page=615#615

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Cronos, thanks for the geography lesson. i cringe when i hear many Americans call Ukraine “the Ukraine”

[Titanites]

I didn't say that the RCC doesn't consider the UCC in unity with them.

Yes, you did. In 353 you said the churches had "labels" slapped on them specifying what they were, that neither considered the other legit, concluding with "so much for unity within Catholicism".

I said that the RC's and the UC's don't consider each other *real* Catholics. It isn't a matter of the official church position being that of unity, it's a matter of the lay Catholics who are not unified.

Here's what you really said in 431: "Roman Catholics didn’t consider them *real* Catholics. Borderline, sort of maybe, but pretty iffy about getting in. Better than Orthodox or Protestants however."

There was no mention of "lay Catholics not being unified," which is something you just added.

Catholics do consider the Ukrainian Greek Catholics to be real Catholics.

Maybe the ones YOU know. It's not an opinion that is universally held.

It is the universally held position of both churches. The only ones claimed not to believe that are through rumor and hearsay.

[Titanites]

Thanks, Salvation. That’s a very useful chart.