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. 

[daniel1212]

A related question is whether or to what extent Popes (particularly Sixtus V) promoted the castration of young boys for the choir of St Peter’s, a common practice in the 17th and 18th centuries (in Protestant countries as well) for providing castrati for choirs:

http://www.hektoeninternational.org/castrati.html
http://www.usrf.org/news/010308-jenkins_lancet.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castrato
http://www.usrf.org/news/010308-castrati.html

[metmom]

I don't care what word is used for it calling me a liar is against the forum rules.

The hypocrisy of what I find myself reading is simply staggering.

[boatbums]

And it only took ten years.... That money and fame will get you anything you want, but the service seems to be a little slow.

Old Teddy did a lot of fooling around both before and after his legal divorce. Not being a fan of his, I have no idea when he met Vickie and decided he wanted a Catholic wedding to a fellow Catholic. How long was his engagement to her before he started to seek the annulment? That's the real question and it STILL doesn't matter how long it took, he got what he wanted/paid for, didn't he?

[Natural Law]

"The hypocrisy of what I find myself reading is simply staggering."

I suggest you contact the Religion Moderator to get an understanding of the private conversation we had on this subject.

[Natural Law]

"That's the real question and it STILL doesn't matter how long it took, he got what he wanted/paid for, didn't he?"

Unfortunately for all involved an Annulment Tribunal is not infallible nor inerrant, especially when dealing with sociopathic master manipulators like Ted Kennedy. I am frankly surprised that those who deny the infallibility of the Magisterium hold administrative functionaries to a higher standard.

Peace be with you

[Salvation]

You are probably right when you say that many Catholics don't know what they are. Although they say the Creed each Sunday (if they aren't Christmas/Easter churchgoers.)

Many non-Catholic churches also have a creed similar to the Nicene Creed. Do you say a creed at your church?

New translation for new Roman Missal

I believe in one God
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only-begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through Him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
He came down from heaven.

(at the following words, up to and including “and became man”, all bow)
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate
of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.

For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
He suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will have no end.

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets;
And in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

[Jvette]

That short list was given by me:)

[boatbums]

It is also noteworthy that while in principal that Rome considers entering marriage with the intention of never having children to be a "grave wrong and more than likely grounds for an annulment."[25] , while praying to a woman who apparently went thru with a marriage intending to do just that, according to some Roman apologetics.

That's exactly what I thought of when I read:

•Perpetual vow of chastity [21]. One of the parties has made a public perpetual vow of chastity. Ecclesiastical, absolute, permanent (unless dispensed by the Apostolic See).

[Jvette]

***That was never stated otherwise or made a point of contention***

Your post commented on the “shortness” of my list and you added others. I just pointed out that the ones you added were developed from the ones I listed.

That is the way the theology and doctrines of the Church are developed. The doctrines don’t change, or contradict, they deepen through centuries of study and prayer and guidance by the Holy Spirit.

I haven’t heard or yet seen an argument against Catholicism that hasn’t be raised before and answered before, even if in a rudimentary way.

But the continuing dissent serves as opportunity to further define or clarify or deepen the Church’s understanding of Scripture and theology.

Catholics are not automatons or robots or mindless boobs, some do in fact dissent and the Church tries to teach them and also learn from them.

[Jvette]

****only two could be Scripurally(sic) proven****

We obviously disagree on that.

[metmom]

It is also noteworthy that while in principal that Rome considers entering marriage with the intention of never having children to be a "grave wrong and more than likely grounds for an annulment."[25] , while praying to a women who apparently went thru with a marriage intending to do just that, according to some Roman apologetics.

ooops......

[bkaycee]

Too bad most Catholics don’t have a clue about church history.

[boatbums]

He is telling us here that the Eucharist is for those who believe what “we” teach are true. If one is receiving the Eucharist, then they are not Catholic in there beliefs and lives, they are in fact, Protestant and should not be receiving the Eucharist.

Just because you want to lump all people who are Christians, but not Roman Catholic, into a bucket labeled "Protestant" doesn't mean they are. By that same token, you shouldn't dump all your pseudo-Catholics into that same bucket either. I highly doubt many Catholic priests would even fall into line with everything that is deemed "essential" Catholic beliefs in faith and morals.

I appreciate that you admit that the Body of Christ IS all believers in Christ who have been baptized into Him. That is certainly a start in moving away from the exclusivity claimed by the Roman Catholic Church to that body. One important point, too, Justin Martyr was around in mid-second century, which places him before there even WAS a Roman Catholic Church having dominion over the Christian world. At his time, the truths taught in Scripture that the Apostles either wrote or authorized as Scripture were the rule of faith and were the source of "the things which we teach are true". Many of the doctrines taught today by the Roman Catholic Church were unheard of in Justin Martyr's time.

[Religion Moderator]

For the purpose of moderating the Religion Forum, the words "prevarication" "dishonesty" "slander" "deceit" "calumny" "subterfuge" are synonymous with "lie" in that they entail intent. When applied to another Freeper, personally, they are "making it personal" by attributing motive.

Words such as "false" "error" "wrong" "inaccurate" "misstatement" do not attribute motive.

Other words push the envelope of motive but are not synonymous with "lie" for purposes of modding the RF. However, they can be "making it personal" if applied to another Freeper, personally, in such a way the discussion becomes "about" the individual Freeper instead of the issues. Those words include "misrepresentation" "detraction" "disinformation" "distortion" "hyperbole" and "doublespeak."

As always, the main RF guideline is "discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal."

[papertyger]

That's the real question and it STILL doesn't matter how long it took, he got what he wanted/ paid for, didn't he?

Sure it does. It puts the lie to the idea the Church just rolls over if you have enough money.

Besides, what's the Church supposed to do when one comes claiming repentance and seeking absolution?

I'm not saying nasty little innuendos aren't deserved by the late senator, but it's certainly not the place of the Church, or any real Christian, to make them.

Furthermore, Protestants are the last ones that should be throwing stones over divorce. Find me one deacon board without a divorced member (let alone Elders, if they even have them) and I'll find you fifty that do....all of which contravenes Scripture.

[boatbums]

Should I have been pinged here out of courtesy?

I was responding to daniel1212's comment at #217. Though you were the one who first posted the "list", my comment was directed to his comment about your post and not specifically to you.

[Jvette]

Well you are indeed right that there was no “Roman” Catholic Church in Justin’s time, back then it was just the Catholic Church. The distinction of “Roman” did not come about until much later.

As for the claim that the doctrines of today were not around, I will again have to disagree with you.

The Deposit of Faith, the revelations of Jesus have been around since the beginning. Jesus’ mission and His message were present long before the incarnation.

Again, there is not contradiction in doctrine and nothing new, only the time and manner in which the Holy Spirit leads the Church in full knowledge of it.

Take abortion for example, there was a time when it was at the “quickening” of the child that some in the Church thought the soul was given by God, and that before that time, one was not a person.

Now, of course, the Church knows that at the moment of conception, the soul is given by God and that life must be protected in all its dignity and preciousness.

What we have from the Apostles is the foundation which is built upon by each succeeding generation of Catholics. Paul speaks of building upon the foundation laid by others.

Jesus said unless the house is built on rock it will wash away. We have that rock which is the faith of the Apostles and the teachings of Jesus to them.

It is supremely shallow thinking that all of God’s revelation is specifically spelled out in the Bible. We see immediately that there is dissension and misunderstandings and false teachings. And in the New Testament we have the foundation of how those things are to be dealt with and how the Truth can be known.

Protestant is not a word I coined. It is universally accepted as meaning non-Catholic. If it is incorrect, then please advise me of a different word I could use when speaking of people who are not Catholic but who also don’t all believe the same things.

[papertyger]

Just because you want to lump all people who are Christians, but not Roman Catholic, into a bucket labeled "Protestant" doesn't mean they are.

Sure they are. Just because they may approve differing doctrines doesn't mean they aren't devotees of the same heresy.

[Jvette]

But, you reprinted content from MY original post.

Just saying.

If I used something from what you posted, I would ping you out of courtesy, that’s all.

Maybe I am confused about the rules.

[boatbums]

Unfortunately for all involved an Annulment Tribunal is not infallible nor inerrant, especially when dealing with sociopathic master manipulators like Ted Kennedy. I am frankly surprised that those who deny the infallibility of the Magisterium hold administrative functionaries to a higher standard.

I don't think anyone really has denied that the annulment process within the Roman Catholic Church is broken - and that has been the point. It's good to see you have finally admitted it after defending the process for the last day or so. It definitely proves the chinks in the armor of infallibly defined infallibility since what "administrative functionaries" do, they do as representatives of the Catholic Church. Their decisions ARE binding upon Roman Catholics, are they not?