Posted on 07/16/2014 4:18:13 AM PDT by NYer
Funny thing is I am a LCMS Lutheran.
We tend to have a very high view of marriage also.
My bride is Catholic, and when we were about get engaged she went to her priest in Lincoln Nebraska and told him she was dating a LCMS boy.
He took her by the hand and laughed. Told her she needed to read the Bible more, and that “Your boyfriend will be very orthodox, but that is ok”.
Turned out the priest knew my pastor, and my pastor growing up .
According to the Religion Forum Guidelines,
“Closed” threads on the Religion Forum include devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses. The header of the thread should make it obvious that the thread is closed, i.e. like a church meeting behind closed doors. Such assemblies will not be disturbed. Any challenges or ridicule will be removed. Any thread can be designated a caucus - e.g. labeled as a “[Catholic Caucus]” or “[LDS Caucus]” - provided that neither the article nor any of the posts challenge or ridicule any other confession. These are “safe harbors” for those who are easily offended or are ill equipped to defend their own confession.
In post #10, Verga is challenging someone on their poor understanding of church teaching. In her response, she suggests the individual consider seeking another church more in keeping with her personal views.
In post #26, Verga remains on topic, lamenting the fact that many Catholics do not read the catechism.
In post $43, another freeper is simply relating the reaction received for citing scripture.
None of these comments qualifies as a disparaging remark. The topic of this thread is Catholic and regards Church teaching. There is nothing here that disparages any other denomination; hence, the Catholic Caucus remains.
I’m not Protestant, but if I were I might take issue with post #30?
Heck, I’m just happy that I can now post here even though I’m not considered Catholic here.
Her husband would most assuredly be a bit put out...
Now there have been instances where people say the Kennedy's for example have been allowed annulments and they should not have been allowed. BUT.... their bad behavior and the Cardinal that let it happen are not justification for the rest of us not following the "rules".
Most priests would strongly advise you not even to date until you have an annulment. But people being people and passion being passion, cause a dilemma for the priest and parishioner a like. So we don't kick people for divorcing and remarrying. Just as we don't kick people out who are living in sin.
But the Eucharist is not a prize. It's a sacrament. Catholics know from an early age what you should do to be prepared for sacraments.
Now I heard in a discussion once that if a person adamantly believes something, say that they should be married for the second time for example, then if they are willing to stand naked before God some day and defend that, then conscience dictates that is what that person should do. But a priest is going to counsel against that, because that is his job and he will be called to account for what he did on earth someday as well. I have never seen a priest flat out refuse the Eucharist to an individual. Now with 2.1 billion people I am sure it's happened, I have just never seen it.
That would qualify, too, although it's a real hoot to see the made up numbers being thrown around as if they were fact.
Heck, I’m just happy that I can now post here even though I’m not considered Catholic here.
THAT'S ironic. You're Catholic the way I was raised, pre-V2.
So much for Catholic unity, eh? Feel the love.....
Actually I was being generous in 51,000.
I didn’t make it up.
http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/fastfacts/fast_facts.html
Also they had only one Lutheran parochial school so they played in the CYO leagues so they didn't have to play the government schools.
From your link...
“There is no official directory for all the congregations in the county, so sociologists of religion have to rely on statistical estimates extrapolated from surveys. These are often disputed, and to complicate matters, thousands of new churches open each year, while thousands of others close.”
I'll say it again, it's very similar to how liberals react to conservatives.
Exactly my point! I’ll stay Catholic Thank You! very much and you all are free to pick whatever you want.
To be fair:
The problem with the often used (yet cringe-worthy IMO) Catholic apologetic of “there are X thousand Protestant denominations” is that it’s all ultimately based on self-identification surveys and/or the definition of “denomination” being simply a different congregation (as in the statistics you cite) not actually different *churches*. (Or lack of a church see below)
Indeed the very source you cite (and really any source any erstwhile Catholic may cite) also says there are “ 24,000 are Catholic and Orthodox churches” (in the US).
So what are we to conclude from that? That there are 24,000 “Catholic denominations”? Heaven forbid!
No, the problem is as I mentioned earlier: these surveys and studies play fast and loose with the definition of “church”. We Catholics (correctly) state that to be a true church, it must have apostolic succession (valid Holy Orders). Which limits the number from thousands to a handful. But the statisticians don’t take that into account in their studies, because such a definition is too limiting for their (usual) purposes since it eliminates all Protestants (statisticians are just interested usually in simple demographic comparison not proper theology).
So there is no true source that “proves” the apologetic. IMO we Catholics should avoid using it for this reason because ultimately it’s distracting from the real message that is: Protestants don’t have unity where it counts, which is on core dogmas, such as the existence of free will for example.
If you were merely discussing YOUR faith, what was the mention of others outside of it in at least 4 different posts on this thread all about?
Why even bring them up?
You guys opened the door. Nobody crashed a caucus thread first.
The unity Christians have is in this.....
John 1:10-13 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 3:14-18 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
John 11:25-26 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Acts 16:27-31 When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul cried with a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” And the jailer called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Romans 10:9-13 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Ephesians 2:1-10And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Yeah, it's a lot of Scripture but the unity is of salvation by faith in Christ, but believing in His name.
There are areas that Paul refers to as *disputable matters*, areas where opinion varies but is not a salvation issue.
And Catholicism certainly has those areas where there's latitude, not only based on church teaching, but also on what we see here on the RF.
Not every Catholic here agrees on everything with each other, much less the church.
The unity Christians have is in this.....
Also, here are links to the statements of faith of various denominations and I don't see them varying significantly in any area.
Assemblies of God
http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Position_Papers/index.cfm#
Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church
http://arpchurch.org/documents/confession-of-faith/
Calvary Chapel
http://calvarychapel.com/home/about/
The Christian and Missionary Alliance
http://www.cmalliance.org/about/history/
Elim Fellowship Churches
http://www.elimfellowship.org/about-us/statement-of-faith/
The Father's House
http://tfhny.org/the-house/what-we-believe/
Osais LA
http://www.oasisla.org/about/what-we-believe/
Presbyterian Church in Americahttp://www.pcaac.org/resources/wcf/
United Reformed church in North America https://www.urcna.org/sysfiles/site_uploads/custom_public/custom2642.pdf
Westside Christian Fellowship
http://westsidechristianfellowship.org/about-wcf/statement-of-faith/
It's there for anyone to read if they choose.
I am only pinging a bunch of others to this comment as a matter of courtesy. I don't know much about the denominational affiliation of most of them nor do I care. They are brothers and sisters in Christ, united together by faith in HIM not what church or denomination we attend.
I know it seems rather vague and nebulous, but our identity is in Christ, not the label hanging out front of the building we worship in.
If I attended a Baptist church, I would not consider myself a Baptist. I would consider myself a follower of Christ first and foremost, who happens at the moment to attend a Baptist church for preaching, teaching, fellowship, encouragement, support, etc.
My salvation is not tied to what church I attend or even the fact of attending church.
Edit...
Not: .....but believing in His name.
Rather: ....BY believing in His name.
The 51,001st; they often won't tell you, which suggests they don't really have confidence their denomination/sect was born from an earlier bona fide apostolic church. Rebellion breeds rebels.
I did not come to this thread to cause trouble. I merely wanted to read some frank Catholic internal discussion about the current pope. But then defconw began referencing and then attacking "proddies." This is in violation of the rules of caucused threads.
Defconw: It is contrary to the rules of Free Republic to use a caucused thread to bash, criticize, or maybe even mention other religions. You are the one who derailed this thread from an inter-Catholic discussion to an anti-Protestant bash fest, and you did so because you thought the people you were bashing would not be allowed to respond.
I'm sorry it came to this but you have only yourself to blame.
Heck one of our Catholic high schools shared a football stadium with the Lutheran high school. Also they had only one Lutheran parochial school so they played in the CYO leagues so they didn't have to play the government schools.
Years ago when we lived up north we lived in a very small village. There were about 6 different denominations. They formed an area association of churches. The purpose was to avoid duplication of effort. The AOG had purchased the old high school and took over the furniture ministry. The Larger Catholic Church took over the Clothing ministry. The Lutherans took over the food pantry. My wife worked there and was in charge of that. The Pastor was a woman and the secretary was Episcopalian converting to Catholicism.
None of the pastors had any difficulty sending people in need to any of the other churches to receive services. And none of them would have even thought about flock poaching.
I agree.
And Catholicism certainly has those areas where there's latitude, not only based on church teaching, but also on what we see here on the RF.
Not every Catholic here agrees on everything with each other, much less the church.
That's correct. (I even posted about this phenomena earlier, in my post #79 on this thread.
Where you and I differ (and I guess where I differ with a lot of Protestants) is in the claim that you guys disagree a lot more, on issues that are more important than what we Catholics disagree. I gave an example of the dogma (it's a dogma in the Catholic Church at least) of free will.
Apparently (correct me if I'm wrong) you don't believe that a full understanding of free will (whether it's real or not) is required for salvation. We Catholics do.
Indeed it astounds me that you (Protestants) claim that whether or not free will even exists isn't that important. Don't you think it's important to know if free will exists or not? Don't you think the existence (or lack thereof) of free will has an impact on your salvation? How can that question go unsettled in the "invisible" church and yet you claim to have "unity in everything that matters for salvation"?
Again, the issue of free will (or the lack thereof) has no bearing on the issue of salvation? Really?
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.