Which Is Better?

[Brother Adam]

Okay, sorry, I just got it. I am used to seeing Orthodox not orthodox, when referring to the religious group. I am used to orthodox meaning right belief. Makes sense now.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='Micah' timestamp='1292951614' post='2193807']
Yes, but unfortunately no.

NewAdvent is very specific in using the word Christian. A Christian is someone who has been baptized and is thus part of the mystical body of Christ. In the broad sense that the mystical body of Christ resides in and is made up of the Catholic Church, the person who doesn't practice his faith is associated with Catholics. [i]But no more than a protestant is, or any other baptized, non-Catholic.[/i]

In the specific and truest sense of Catholic. No. One must practice the Catholic faith to be Catholic. One must believe in the teachings of the Catholic faith to be Catholic.
[/quote]
Baptism is a bit less cut-and-dry due to the fact that it may be validly conferred by lay persons. Let's use a firmer example: Confirmation also leaves an indelible mark on the soul. What does a confirmed Catholic become if he ceases to practice, then?
A sheep separated from the flock is still a sheep.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1293435118' post='2194608']
Baptism is a bit less cut-and-dry due to the fact that it may be validly conferred by lay persons. Let's use a firmer example: Confirmation also leaves an indelible mark on the soul. What does a confirmed Catholic become if he ceases to practice, then?
A sheep separated from the flock is still a sheep.
[/quote]

Jesus was pretty clear that sheep could turn themselves into goats.

~Sternhauser

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1292863965' post='2193633']
Many CINOs in the flock nowadays.


A Catholic is a Catholic forever, no matter his current professions or beliefs.
[/quote]

Yeah, thanks US! As I read through this thread and seeing 'you're not a Catholic if...' I was wondering about how that fits. None of us are perfect, we are all defective including the Popes from Peter onwards. 'Live by the sword die by the sword... ' '...you will betray me three times...'
Knowing that in the third world there are children who are born to sleep on the side of the road and eat rotten food if they can find any and crawl up a lane-way to die, that I'm not convinced that the Churches view on contraception is right. I have my doubts, therefore I guess that if what people write here is true then I'm not a Catholic because my compassion betrays me.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1293481207' post='2194651']
Yeah, thanks US! As I read through this thread and seeing 'you're not a Catholic if...' I was wondering about how that fits. None of us are perfect, we are all defective including the Popes from Peter onwards. 'Live by the sword die by the sword... ' '...you will betray me three times...'
Knowing that in the third world there are children who are born to sleep on the side of the road and eat rotten food if they can find any and crawl up a lane-way to die, that I'm not convinced that the Churches view on contraception is right. I have my doubts, therefore I guess that if what people write here is true then I'm not a Catholic because my compassion betrays me.
[/quote]

It is certainly possible to be a heretic, apostate, schismatic, and otherwise reject the faith while ontologically remaining a child of God. I can imagine those graces and indelible marks on our soul will make hell even more painful as our soul knows its true place with the Father if they die in mortal sin. It is a false sense of compassion and an erroneous understanding of love to suggest that sin (contraception or its companion, abortion) will fix poverty. That same sense of "compassion" lead a religious sister in Texas to start escorting women into abortuaries to murder their own children. Humanae Vitae was of course, prophetically on target. Any Catholic who does not understand an infallible teaching of the Church has both the right to ask for help in understanding, and a duty to fully accept the faith until such an understanding is found. If a Catholic finds that they openly reject Catholic teaching they should refrain from receiving Communion.

True love would pick the child up out of the gutter and teach families true chastity, not recommend the destruction of the family. Contraception destroys the image of the Trinity in the family, objectifies men and women, makes children unwanted, closes the family off from life, leads to promiscuity, disease, abortion, and has ushered in a culture of death by which the ruler of the world and prince of darkness laughs at us. As Mother Teresa said, that is true poverty. That is also why the Catholic Church is the single most charitable organization in the world. Yes, it is more difficult to help both families and the poor, but who ever said that the Way was going to be easy or convenient?

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' timestamp='1292770397' post='2193455']
ty
[/quote]

To answer the question, it would be better to be Orthodox. The Catholic Church considers the Orthodox and the Catholic Church the left and right lungs of the body of Christ. In the Second Vatican Council the Orthodox take a special place among the Christian churches. There is no sense of urgency to convert the Orthodox to the Catholic faith, however much we long to be united with our brothers and sisters in Christ. There is little that separates us, and the Orthodox celebrate valid Sacraments. A Catholic on the other hand who openly rejects Catholic teaching places his soul in danger, assuming he is not ignorant of the truth.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Brother Adam' timestamp='1293501488' post='2194701']
It is certainly possible to be a heretic, apostate, schismatic, and otherwise reject the faith while ontologically remaining a child of God. I can imagine those graces and indelible marks on our soul will make hell even more painful as our soul knows its true place with the Father if they die in mortal sin. It is a false sense of compassion and an erroneous understanding of love to suggest that sin (contraception or its companion, abortion) will fix poverty. That same sense of "compassion" lead a religious sister in Texas to start escorting women into abortuaries to murder their own children. Humanae Vitae was of course, prophetically on target. Any Catholic who does not understand an infallible teaching of the Church has both the right to ask for help in understanding, and a duty to fully accept the faith until such an understanding is found. If a Catholic finds that they openly reject Catholic teaching they should refrain from receiving Communion.

True love would pick the child up out of the gutter and teach families true chastity, not recommend the destruction of the family. Contraception destroys the image of the Trinity in the family, objectifies men and women, makes children unwanted, closes the family off from life, leads to promiscuity, disease, abortion, and has ushered in a culture of death by which the ruler of the world and prince of darkness laughs at us. As Mother Teresa said, that is true poverty. That is also why the Catholic Church is the single most charitable organization in the world. Yes, it is more difficult to help both families and the poor, but who ever said that the Way was going to be easy or convenient?
[/quote]

I don't disagree with the reasons that you have given for the Church rules. What I was saying is that it is only natural for a person having observed things first hand to have some degree of doubt about that. And I do accept them even though I do not understand or cannot see the reasoning behind them as really being valid. But in spite of that I considered that my position was to 'pick up out of the gutter' what children I could, it's the ones that I couldn't because of numbers that haunt my dreams. but I would never consider it my position to advise people to defy Church teaching.
[quote]the Catholic Church is the single most charitable organization in the world.[/quote]
I'm very proud of that!

[dairygirl4u2c]

 from a catholic perspective, it seems like thessalonian made a pretty
compelling argument with the considerations he gave. eg, a catholic who
knows the ins and outs but doesn't practice as a 'true' catholic, is
hard to say is better than an orthodox who knows no better.



but,,, it'd seem from a catholic perspective, that one could say in the
right situation that the catholic who dissents is better off. eg the
orthodox guy, and the catholic. both dissent on infallibility. both know
the ins and outs of both the catholic and orthodox church. the catholic
is more catholic than the orthodox guy though in their beliefs and
practices. given the catholic is closer to full truth, wouldnt he be
better off than the orthodox guy? a person might say it hurts true unity
given he won't assent fully... but the other side is that one is closer
to full truth in belief and practice. it seems at worst it's debatable,
but i'd argue whoever is closer to full truth is the one who's better
off.