[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Said, something about cigarettes giving me cancer or some nonsense and going to Hell for being Catholic. Lovely people.[/quote]
I don’t smoke, but being the smartass I am, I would have answered with a straight face, “smoking is helping me to prepare to breath the air in hell,” or something along those lines.
I personally take issue with some of the Catholic Churches teachings having been personally raised Catholic. A lot of what has been explained to me in my years of education was many of the rules/laws declared were more in opposition to something un-related to our faith than to actually being a engrained in the Bible or Biblical teaching.
I don’t believe that sex has always only been useful for “the baby act”. That has been an ideal sent along for the sake of adding more people to the Catholic Church, much like contraception is not permitted, only natural family planning, to which is has been shown time and again was not 100% successful. Good measures to fill your pews. There is corruption everywhere, because as has been said, man is fallen. So for me, I no longer identify as a particular “denomination” of Christianity. I am Christian and that is what I believe, what I follow, and that is enough for me. Over 2000 years all of the denominations have fallen away from the original purpose and even with the attempts to return to the original purpose, it is more steeped in politics and tradition than the intent. Similar to what the Pharisees are described as in the New Testament - to which I mean no offense to those of Jewish faith, wasn’t the point, just an example.
Edit: To try and forego a flaming/beating I’ll further explain the Pharisee example. In the Bible Jesus referred to the Letter of the Law and the Spirit of the Law, when the Pharisees challenged his stance on many things trying to disprove who he claimed to be. Much as the Pharisees were highly religious and followed the Letter of the Law as it was written so do many of the “rules” set by the various demoninations get followed, whilst all forget the Spirit of the Law, which is the true intent and purpose of the Law in the first place.
I have had the pleasure of knowing some of the greatest, kindest, and perhaps wisest Priests in my life, and a couple Pastors, but I’ve also seen the dark side of both. It is the man the falls, not the faith, and it is in man that my faith is lacking.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
P.S. I hate that term, Conservative Christian. You can only be Christian, either you’re a heretic or you’re an orthodox Christian. Believe what Jesus and the Apostles taught or you don’t. You don’t get to make up your own morality. But, I don’t believe you’ll find MLK backing you up on gay-rights = black rights.
[/quote]
Could you kindly define Orthodox Christian further, or do you just mean believing in the teachings or not, as you follow-up with in the next sentence. I assume you don’t mean a denomination known as “Orthodox Christian” and the other denominations are heretics, but I could be wrong.[/quote]
Orthodox = right teaching. I am Eastern Catholic, so I view myself as Orthodox in union with the Pope.
Orthodox Christians are considered to be very close to the Catholic Church, but they are schismatics so it has more to do with right practice than right teaching.
I don’t mean (it’s not a denomination) Orthodox Christians (such as Greek Orthodox). I mean baptized folks who believe in the correct doctrines.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Said, something about cigarettes giving me cancer or some nonsense and going to Hell for being Catholic. Lovely people.[/quote]
I don’t smoke, but being the smartass I am, I would have answered with a straight face, “smoking is helping me to prepare to breath the air in hell,” or something along those lines.
I personally take issue with some of the Catholic Churches teachings having been personally raised Catholic. A lot of what has been explained to me in my years of education was many of the rules/laws declared were more in opposition to something un-related to our faith than to actually being a engrained in the Bible or Biblical teaching.
I don’t believe that sex has always only been useful for “the baby act”. That has been an ideal sent along for the sake of adding more people to the Catholic Church, much like contraception is not permitted, only natural family planning, to which is has been shown time and again was not 100% successful. Good measures to fill your pews. There is corruption everywhere, because as has been said, man is fallen. So for me, I no longer identify as a particular “denomination” of Christianity. I am Christian and that is what I believe, what I follow, and that is enough for me. Over 2000 years all of the denominations have fallen away from the original purpose and even with the attempts to return to the original purpose, it is more steeped in politics and tradition than the intent. Similar to what the Pharisees are described as in the New Testament - to which I mean no offense to those of Jewish faith, wasn’t the point, just an example.
Edit: To try and forego a flaming/beating I’ll further explain the Pharisee example. In the Bible Jesus referred to the Letter of the Law and the Spirit of the Law, when the Pharisees challenged his stance on many things trying to disprove who he claimed to be. Much as the Pharisees were highly religious and followed the Letter of the Law as it was written so do many of the “rules” set by the various demoninations get followed, whilst all forget the Spirit of the Law, which is the true intent and purpose of the Law in the first place.
I have had the pleasure of knowing some of the greatest, kindest, and perhaps wisest Priests in my life, and a couple Pastors, but I’ve also seen the dark side of both. It is the man the falls, not the faith, and it is in man that my faith is lacking.
[/quote]
Well, nice to meet you! I love fallen away Catholics.
I personally consider myself to be a “Evangelical” Catholic. My day job is literally to evangelize and share the Gospel. I understand your frustrations though, I deal with lack luster priests almost on a daily basis, sometimes it blows my mind. However, because of certain oaths I’ll always be in solidarity with Priests. Had a few that saved my life recently, actually.
Orthodox = right teaching. I am Eastern Catholic, so I view myself as Orthodox in union with the Pope.
Orthodox Christians are considered to be very close to the Catholic Church, but they are schismatics so it has more to do with right practice than right teaching.
I don’t mean (it’s not a denomination) Orthodox Christians (such as Greek Orthodox). I mean baptized folks who believe in the correct doctrines.
[/quote]
Hmmm. Eastern Catholic equals Orthodox Christian, but does not equal Eastern Orthodox, nor does it equal Roman Catholic?
Fascinating. How does the dogma and liturgy of your Church differ from that of the Church of Rome? And I realize that this may be a question with a long answer.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Hmmm. Eastern Catholic equals Orthodox Christian, but does not equal Eastern Orthodox, nor does it equal Roman Catholic?
Fascinating. How does the dogma and liturgy of your Church differ from that of the Church of Rome? And I realize that this may be a question with a long answer.[/quote]
Eastern Catholic is a blanket term for about 22 Eastern Churches in union with the Pope.
Eastern Catholic = Orthodox Christian = Eastern Orthodox in union with the Pope. But, Eastern Catholic =/= Roman Catholic.
A Roman Catholic would be a Catholic who is Latin (their liturgy is Latin or Vernacular and their philosophy is Aristotelean-Thomist (or Western), basically they are influenced from being in the Western Roman Empire, in contrast with Eastern Catholics who have been influenced by being located in the Eastern Roman Empire.
It is easily reconciled, since we believe the same thing. We have the same fundamental dogmas (how we explain it is different), the liturgy is the big difference. It is still the same Mass, so Jesus is still Present. But, the style of how we do it is different. Though the important parts are still there. If you walked into an Orthodox liturgy, that’s the same liturgy my Church uses, except we say the name of Pope Francis where it is appropriate.
Thanks for defining it Brother Chris, I had assumed that was your definition, but wanted to ensure we weren’t referring to one of the Christian denominations under that title of “orthodox.”
To complicate things further, my girlfriend is Ukranian Orthodox, which I believe is different from Eastern Orthodox, though I admit to not knowing the direct relation. I do know they still follow some of the very strict “old ways” during mass. I have attended a few times. I think, and Brother Chris can correct me, that the Roman Catholics held allegiance to Rome and the Pope, where the Eastern Catholics had set up almost their own sub-culture (maybe Pope I don’t recall) in Byzantine, the then capital of the Eastern World.
I’ve since given up on denominations, and elected to go with the “forward thinking” that if you’re truly a Christian, and actually live that way and believe it, you’re a Christian, doesn’t matter if Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, Baptist, Non-Denominational, Evangelical, Protestant, whatever. I just look at them as “clubs” of similar thinking people, nothing more.
Brother Chris, I’m sure you have quite the job if your goal is to bring around fallen away Catholics. I’ll never forget when I learned in school that Catholic meant “universal” to represent the entirety of the Church. Yet now it stands as only a shard, or piece, of what is Christianity.
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Thanks for defining it Brother Chris, I had assumed that was your definition, but wanted to ensure we weren’t referring to one of the Christian denominations under that title of “orthodox.”[/quote]
No problem.
Well, Roman Catholics is a misnomer, Latin Catholics is their proper title. Yes, Latin Catholics have always been under the Bishop of Rome, that is their respective “See” like Byzantine Orthodox (not Byzantine Catholics) are under the See of Constantinople.
Ah, I see. Where did you get this from?
Yes, I’m a Catholic Missionary. I live off “providence” or I fundraise the cost of ministry and rely completely on donations.
It is still a valid term for the Catholic Church, just other groups have chosen to separate themselves from the true Church. Which of course is sad, because there is no salvation outside the Church. They choose to believe something that makes them feel better rather than have salvation or they just don’t know better. IDK.
I think the frustration was not so much an attempt to break away from God, but a frustration with what was occurring in the Church. Hence why they are called Protestants. Though you probably know the history better than I since it is your profession and field of study.
I do recall Biblically that being a part of the Church was important, for fellowship and leadership, but I do not recall it stating that only through the Pope and the Church can one gain salvation. Was this a later Papal document or revelation? Or did I again miss something as Varq tends to remind me (I do appreciate this though, I haven’t had a good discussion on this topic in so long, makes me miss college.)
As for me, I take consequence with some of the beliefs that Catholicism holds. Such as the Sacrament of Reconciliation. I can understand there being a mediator/assistant to speak to God, but if God is truly omniscient, why can I not speak to Him any time and ask forgiveness? Is it because I am too lowly to do so, am I not His child the same as a priest? How does repeating Holy Mary’s or Our Father’s absolve me of my sins? Does it really cleanse my heart, or does the pause, reflection, and desire to try not to do it again grant me forgiveness?
I’ve met the most humble of Priests, whom would do anything for one of their parishioners, let alone a stranger. And then I had the pleasure of meeting a Bishop, a higher steward and leader to the Priests, a Captain if you will. He was arrogant, held his hand for people to kiss it, etc. So the Bible teaches humility and serving - Jesus washed the feet of his disciples - and yet here sat this bishop being waited on hand and foot by the priests that reported to him, treating his parishioners as denizens, as opposed to serving them?
How can people attend Church on Sunday to cleanse their prior week’s sinning only to go back out on Monday and do it all over again? Where is the true repenting here? How about the people who go through the motions and have been baptized, are they somehow more important than an unbaptized in a third world who lives well, and dare I say, lives as Jesus would have wanted? Should our original sin serve greater weight than our actions in life? Is knowing Jesus by saying His name, really required, or knowing Him by following His teachings and message whether you have personally heard them or not?
I see men do great things in the Church and I see them struggle under the weight to answer the difficult questions for some of the Church’s actions/stances. With what has been at least corrupted from time to time through history, should the true focus be to save face for the Church, or to bring people to Christ by representing Him?
Power corrupts and I’ve seen it in every denomination. Catholics who don’t truly believe what they follow but do so because that’s what they are supposed to do. Leaders of the Church breaking rules, covering up the scandals, and even using religious influence to play politics in history. Protestants who look down on Catholics because they are the “new, better version.” Evangelicals more interested in receiving one of the “seven gifts” for self-edification moreso than spreading the word so others can understand. Non-denominationals preaching and praising one thing, yet following another mindset in their own personal lives.
It is the fallen state of man that I detest, not my faith. Did you ever read the book, The Black Pearl? That is an excellent example of religion/truth. Give man something beautiful, perfect, and precious, and he will find a way to corrupt it, mar its beauty, and satisfy his own greed at its expense. There are some that go against this mentality, but they are too far spread across to claim one denomination or faith is “right.” Its the pursuit of living well and doing good to those around you that I believe any God would want.
If I created a life (such as a child) I would honor and respect those who upheld my child and hate those who didn’t. They never have to know me, the father of that child, nor meet me, but so long as they treat my child well, they are my friend. I would imagine as we are made in His image, we share some commonality.
I had a very close professor in College. Actually he was our Computer Engineering professor. I sat down at dinner with him before graduation and posed the following question: What if you died and found out that you had lived a life that was a lie, that God didn’t exist, or that you chose the wrong walk of faith? He smiled and answered, “I chose my walk of faith because it is what I believe is the right way to live. If I should die tomorrow and find that I chose wrong, then I will still have died happy and satisfied knowing that I lived a good life, that I loved and cared for my wife and family, and that I treated others well. I would have no regrets.”
And that to me, is what is most important, and something to live for/by. Regardless of whether I chose right or wrong, I can still live my life right. If I can go through life respecting others, helping where I can, and enjoying this gift given to me, then I think I’ll have truly achieved the “goal” that someone greater than I has set. If not, then at least I gave it my best shot to be an asset and not a detriment to those around me.
[quote]Severiano wrote:
Liberal Christians were also primarily the ones who politically pushed for what Martin Luther King wanted…[/quote]
This is blatantly false. Liberal Christians were not the primary ones, liberals were the ones going against MLK. They were/are the KKK, they were/are the segregationists, they were the advocates for Jim Crow, they were the defenders of slavery, liberals were the reason it took dozens of attempts by conservative Christians (GOP) to pass a Civil Rights Act.
Liberals are the ones who stood in front of school buildings doors (actually it was the Governor himself) in Arkansas keeping black children from entering after de-segregation and required military action.
Liberals were the ones who always have and still held true blue segregationists, white supremacists, and Klansman in their ranks up until only a few election cycles (actually I have a suspicion there is a local Democrat here in Missouri that is a Klansman (though he obviously is not open as they were 15-20 years ago.
Now, don’t get me wrong. Not all Democrats are Klansman, but all Klansman are Democrats.
Now that I demolished that nonsense.
MLK was a Republican and a “Conservative” Christian.
P.S. I hate that term, Conservative Christian. You can only be Christian, either you’re a heretic or you’re an orthodox Christian. Believe what Jesus and the Apostles taught or you don’t. You don’t get to make up your own morality. But, I don’t believe you’ll find MLK backing you up on gay-rights = black rights.
[/quote]
You better have them reduce your dosage.
Yes the Democrats of the south were the KKK but they were not liberals. The Southern Democrats of that time evolved (devolved?) into the Republican party of today. Those people that marched with king would be horrified at the republican party of today, and yes they would most likely be liberals now.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
While all the bible thumpers bemoan what they see as a “gay agenda”, and lie awake at night trembling over what they surely believe will be a super gay apocalypse, I thought it would be appropriate to start a thread discussing the “christian agenda”. Personally, I think that there’s a certified shit-ton of christians out there, who would LOVE to see this country declare itself a christian theocracy, and throw off what they see as the chains of secularism.
I wouldn’t mind an organic Catholic monarchy in America. But, even if that was the case I would fight against making Christianity the state religion. [/quote]
I am totally against theocracies, for the record. Governments should be secular and freedom of religion should be carved in stone.
A forced faith is no faith at all.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
While all the bible thumpers bemoan what they see as a “gay agenda”, and lie awake at night trembling over what they surely believe will be a super gay apocalypse, I thought it would be appropriate to start a thread discussing the “christian agenda”. Personally, I think that there’s a certified shit-ton of christians out there, who would LOVE to see this country declare itself a christian theocracy, and throw off what they see as the chains of secularism.
I think this is trumped up bullshit. Sounds like preaching tolerance by being intolerant of dissenting viewpoints. You are free to disagree so long as you do not disagree. Christians need to be tolerant so other don’t have to.
[quote]Karado wrote:
IDK Man, you never hear the term ‘‘Quran Thumpers’’, yet they are WAY more Anti-Gay and Islam is
the fastest growing religion in America…and if one thinks Christians are Anti-Gay, if you’re gay, go ahead
and try to ‘out’ yourself in a Muslim Country and see how tolerant they are toward you because you just may be
beheaded before noon.
I’m a great admirer of Martin Luther King so I will leave recent historical ‘‘Christianity’’ alone because IMO he was probably
the best example of a Christian America’s ever had, but YES there are many so-called ‘‘Christians’’ today that
that have gone off the rails and are hypocrites that need to straighten their shit out.[/quote]
That’s pretty big brush you got there. Look in the mirror lately?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
I dunno, BC. The Catholics may have the numbers and the history, but the Westboro Baptists could give you a run for your money in the enthusiasm department. [/quote]
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Oh, come on. A little theocracy never hurt anybody. [/quote]
Yeah! Atheist states are far kinder…[/quote]
Where is that, Russia? China? Two societies that definitely forced the religion of Communism down their citizens throats. The very essence of theocracy.
I am totally against theocracies, for the record. Governments should be secular and freedom of religion should be carved in stone.
A forced faith is no faith at all.[/quote]
[quote]Karado wrote:
IDK Man, you never hear the term ‘‘Quran Thumpers’’, yet they are WAY more Anti-Gay and Islam is
the fastest growing religion in America…and if one thinks Christians are Anti-Gay, if you’re gay, go ahead
and try to ‘out’ yourself in a Muslim Country and see how tolerant they are toward you because you just may be
beheaded before noon.
I’m a great admirer of Martin Luther King so I will leave recent historical ‘‘Christianity’’ alone because IMO he was probably
the best example of a Christian America’s ever had, but YES there are many so-called ‘‘Christians’’ today that
that have gone off the rails and are hypocrites that need to straighten their shit out.[/quote]
That’s pretty big brush you got there. Look in the mirror lately?[/quote]
[quote]theBeth wrote:
I think maybe Catholicism realizes their papal history of sexual deviancy and corruption precedes any efforts they could make to campaign against that sort of thing. Westboro is just another Jim Jone’s special in the making. Every group is certain they are right and everyone else is wrong. “Those who speak, don’t know. Those who know, don’t speak” - lao tzu
[/quote]
Sounds like you need to brush up on your history.
I love eastern philosophy. The propensity to make something meaningless sound profound is perfected in eastern philosophy.
So like if you don’t speak, like you know! Like man, ya know man! You just do. If you speak, you don’t know man.
I don’t dig it.
The irony is that lao spoke, so how the hell does he know?
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
I think the frustration was not so much an attempt to break away from God, but a frustration with what was occurring in the Church. Hence why they are called Protestants. Though you probably know the history better than I since it is your profession and field of study. [/quote]
Yes, still pride though. Thinking that you can determine truth better than the institution that Jesus founded and has promised to protect.
Three times the Church has declared that there is no salvation outside the Church. This is backed up by Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
Jesus gave us the Sacrament for our benefit. We receive sanctifying grace when we go to confession and make a contrite confession of our sins. You can speak directly to God, but we have to have perfect contrition to do it directly, which is hard and you’d never be sure if the sins were forgiven as we can’t judge if we have perfect contrition.
Repeating Hail Mary’s and Our Father’s don’t absolve your sin, the priest in the person of Christ (so therefore Christ) absolves your sin. The Hail Mary and Our Father’s are penance. They make up for some of the temporal punishment of sin. Yes, it can but you have to want it to. You can’t just go through the motions.
Well, you should kiss the ring of a Bishop. It is a sign of respect, just like you should kiss your mother on the cheek when you come into the house and stand when your elders enter the room. Did the Bishop do something wrong? Sounds like he was more about the trappings of his office, but I can’t judge since I don’t know which Bishop or all the facts. But, nevertheless just because there are people who don’t follow what the Church teaches doesn’t mean YOU shouldn’t follow it.
Because they are fallen. Lack understanding. I don’t know, many reasons.
I don’t know, have you repented? I know I go every Tuesday to confession, and I haven’t committed a mortal sin in a long time.
No, we’re all created in the image and likeness of God.
You can’t go to Heaven with either original sin or mortal sin on your soul.
We are bound by the grace of the sacraments, but God’s grace is not bound by the sacraments.
Being Catholic isn’t about doing good things, it is about being Holy and knowing Jesus Christ.
[quote]Power corrupts and I’ve seen it in every denomination. Catholics who don’t truly believe what they follow but do so because that’s what they are supposed to do. Leaders of the Church breaking rules, covering up the scandals, and even using religious influence to play politics in history. Protestants who look down on Catholics because they are the “new, better version.” Evangelicals more interested in receiving one of the “seven gifts” for self-edification moreso than spreading the word so others can understand. Non-denominationals preaching and praising one thing, yet following another mindset in their own personal lives.
It is the fallen state of man that I detest, not my faith.[/quote]
So, you detest yourself? The only man that walked this earth that wasn’t fallen was Jesus. Jesus loved fallen man, that’s why he came and died on the cross on the day he did. Because he loved the good thief so much that he wanted to be on the cross next to him so he could save the good thief.
No, anyone can live “good.” Jesus Christ wants you to know him and to live a holy life through prayer and sacraments. That’s why he built the Church upon the Apostles.
[quote]If I created a life (such as a child) I would honor and respect those who upheld my child and hate those who didn’t. They never have to know me, the father of that child, nor meet me, but so long as they treat my child well, they are my friend. I would imagine as we are made in His image, we share some commonality.
I had a very close professor in College. Actually he was our Computer Engineering professor. I sat down at dinner with him before graduation and posed the following question: What if you died and found out that you had lived a life that was a lie, that God didn’t exist, or that you chose the wrong walk of faith? He smiled and answered, “I chose my walk of faith because it is what I believe is the right way to live. If I should die tomorrow and find that I chose wrong, then I will still have died happy and satisfied knowing that I lived a good life, that I loved and cared for my wife and family, and that I treated others well. I would have no regrets.”
And that to me, is what is most important, and something to live for/by. Regardless of whether I chose right or wrong, I can still live my life right. [/quote]
But, there is only one Way, one Truth, one Path. You have to chose the right way to live to live your life right.
(I do appreciate this though, I haven’t had a good discussion on this topic in so long, makes me miss college.)
