Posted on 10/20/2015 12:34:51 AM PDT by OrthodoxIndianCatholic
Introduction :
It is my objective and endeavour to bring Ex-Catholics back to the Catholic Church in 2015 as well as in 2016. I intend to achieve this through "Catholic Classics".
What I mean is this -- I want Catholics who have left the Catholic Church to read awesome and amazing "Catholic Books" posted on my Catholic Blog.
Many Catholics in India specially in "Metro Cities" have left the Catholic Church and have joined "Non - Denominational Churches".
Most of them are unaware of "Catholic Classics" which encompass and explain the beautiful Catholic Faith.
In Cities like Mumbai in Maharashtra, Panjim and Margao in Goa, Bangalore in Karnataka, and Chennai in Tamil Nadu Catholics have left the Church for a variety of reasons; mostly for monetary reasons but some have also left because of animosity with Priests, or Nuns, or Bishops.
Let me tell you my personal story with regard to "Catholic Classics" and how they changed my life forever.
In Mid- 2012, 3 years back, I was quite angry with Catholic Priests because of negative experiences I had with them while growing up in Mumbai.
In the latter half of 2012, while surfing the "Net" for Catholic Websites I came across a beautiful, outstanding, and extra-ordinary Catholic Website called "E-Catholic 2000"-- "Catholics for the Third Millenium".
Once, I entered this amazing website I happened to stumble across four Catholic Classics--
1) Calvary and the Mass.
2) True Devotion to Mary.
3) Secret of the Rosary.
4) Secret of Mary.
After reading these 4 Catholic Classics over a number of months - I lost all animosity I may have had against Catholic Priests in Mumbai or anywhere else.
I promise you that when you read these 4 books, you will be changed forever and will fall in love with the Catholic - Christian Faith instantly as I did.
These are 4 Books, that positively changes lives and souls.
Read them and you will never be sorry that you visited my "Catholic Blog" accidentally or purposely.
These "Catholic Classics" proudly promote Jesus Christ as the "Centre of our Faith".
The Catholic Church is more than 2000 years old. Let us never forget that.
These Catholic Classics present to us the vibrant Catholic Faith as it has been through the centuries.
Conclusion :
No one will ever regret reading "Catholic Books" @ my blog. These Catholic Books help to build one up in the faith and help to strengthen one about the truths of the Catholic Faith.
I strongly recommend 4 Catholic Classics to Catholics who have left the Church and who might visit my Catholic Blog in the future.
1) Calvary and the Mass
http://www.ecatholic2000.com/calvary/mass.shtml
2) True Devotion to Mary
http://www.ecatholic2000.com/montfort/true/devotion.shtml
3) Secret of the Rosary
http://www.ecatholic2000.com/montfort/rosary/rosary.shtml
4) Secret of Mary
http://www.ecatholic2000.com/montfort/secret/secret.shtml
Happy and Holy Reading.
Of course not.
No Catholic ever does when confronted with a question they don’t want to answer.
Which means in their minds, they are greater than the pope and they know better than the pope.
Every Catholic his own pope. All 1.2 (or whatever the number is today) billion of them.
And Catholics have a really big problem calling Mary *Mother of JESUS*.
I have a problem with it when by all appearances it's used to avoid calling Jesus God. If you want to say "Mary is the mother of Jesus" and then qualify it with "and Jesus is God" every time you say it then I suppose that's no big issue. Remember, it's not about who she is, it's about who HE is. Even when it looks like it's about her, it's always about HIM.
“Do not broad brush a group as bigots.”
So it would be wrong to say the Ku Klux Klan is bigots - because that’s a group. It has an actual group name (Ku Klux Klan).
So is it also wrong to say racists are bigots?
“Going back, these are the claims made about Mary in your post....”
Looks like you need to go back further because that claim was not made in my post. I simply responded to the post in which it was made.
“Catholics seem have this problem in understanding just who did the laying down of Jesus’ life.”
No. At the Last Supper Jesus anticipated the free offering of his life
610 Jesus gave the supreme expression of his free offering of himself at the meal shared with the twelve Apostles “on the night he was betrayed”. On the eve of his Passion, while still free, Jesus transformed this Last Supper with the apostles into the memorial of his voluntary offering to the Father for the salvation of men: “This is my body which is given for you.” “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Can you name a single Catholic here at FR who thinks Jesus did not voluntarily offer up His own life on the cross? Even one?
BC you hang out in the religion forum and spend your days attacking Catholics does not mean I have to hang out with you. Many here make FR a bash a Catholic Day every day. I have a life. Bash away, but I don’t have to bother with your comments. I had thought JimRob was stopping that pastime here, but it was not to be.
My understanding was that he was stopping the daily posting of incendiary THREADS by a certain (departed) FReeper. Open threads are fair game for vigorous dissent WHICH CAN BE AVOIDED WITH THE CAUCUS LABEL.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3350584/posts?page=198#198
Note the context my post was referencing.
I think I will pass on that. No need for ice today. 😂😀😎
Show me the bashing.
Show me where I *attack* Catholics, meaning, of course, the personal people on a personal level, since you used the term *Catholics* instead of *Catholicism*.
I asked you three simple questions in post 148.
How is that bashing?
One more example of fantasy, holding that something is so because an autocratic church said so. Yet which also is another example of confusion due to the often ambiguous or changeable nature of Cath. teaching.
In Scripture, one who would reject a false gospel for the true one are declared to no longer be what they were before. Instead they were called Christians. (Acts 11:26) Likewise to reject the gospel for another, or impenitently continued in willful sin is to effectively leave the faith. (Heb. 3:12; 10:38,39; Gal.5:1-4) Such could not be called "Christian," because that term denotes a certain class of souls following the risen Lord by faith.
But while makes it easy to become a Catholic, even just by desire, yet at best it requires something akin to a marriage license for her to consider one to no longer be a Catholic, if she allows it at all.
In the past Rome required:
For the abandonment of the Catholic Church to be validly configured as a true actus formalis defectionis ab Ecclesia so that the exceptions foreseen in the previously mentioned canons would apply, it is necessary that there concretely be:
a) the internal decision to leave the Catholic Church;
b) the realization and external manifestation of that decision; and
c) the reception of that decision by the competent ecclesiastical authority...the formal act of defection must have more than a juridical-administrative character (the removal of one’s name from a Church membership registry maintained by the government in order to produce certain civil consequences), but be configured as a true separation from the constitutive elements of the life of the Church: it supposes, therefore, an act of apostasy, heresy or schism.
...schism and apostasy do not in themselves constitute a formal act of defection if they are not externally concretized and manifested to the ecclesiastical authority in the required manner.
It is required, moreover, that the act be manifested by the interested party in written form, before the competent authority of the Catholic Church:
Consequently, only the convergence of the two elements – the theological content of the interior act and its manifestation in the manner defined above – constitutes the actus formalis defectionis ab Ecclesia catholica... the competent ecclesiastical authority mentioned above is to provide that this act be noted in the baptismal registry (cfr. can. 535, § 2) with explicit mention of the occurrence of a “defectio ab Ecclesia catholica actu formali”. - ACTUS FORMALIS DEFECTIONIS AB ECCLESIA CATHOLICA, March 2006; http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html
Formal defection was also mentioned in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (canons 1086, § 1, 1117 and 1124), but apparently the term "formal defection" was stricken from those canons in in 2010 per order of Benedict in MOTU PROPRIO (2009)
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.