choosing not to be catholic

[Winchester]

Infallibility is not inspiration.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Winchester' date='20 May 2010 - 02:02 PM' timestamp='1274385769' post='2114308']
Infallibility is not inspiration.
[/quote]
Alas, sometimes it is presented that way, which is what leads to the type of confusion experienced by Anomaly. Moreover, many Catholics simply assume that Cardinal Newman's theory of doctrinal development is true, but anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the ancient Fathers knows that they would have rejected any idea that later generations can "know" more about the faith than the Apostles and their immediate successors.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

Wow, I got a negative point for simply stating the obvious, i.e., that there is theological confusion among Catholics today.

[Apotheoun]

I do not think that it is all that controversial to say that when people mess around with the "rule of prayer" it has an impact upon the "rule of belief." After all, I do not think that Cranmer revised the prayer book of the English Church in the 16th century just for the heck of it.

[MIKolbe]

lucidly spoken

[Apotheoun]

[img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/uploads/profile/photo-1212.jpg[/img] loves MIkolbe

[jeffpugh]

Bunny!!!

I refuse to speculate. I stand on the shoulders of the giant L_D.

[Selah]

[quote]Alas[/quote]

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='22 May 2010 - 10:24 AM' timestamp='1274541858' post='2115355']
Bunny!!!

I refuse to speculate. I stand on the shoulders of the giant L_D.
[/quote]
+1 reference.

[Guest]

[quote name='dUSt' timestamp='1129428903' post='759769']
Well, you said [b]everything[/b]. That's five years worth of debates, arguments and proof. That's a lot of information. Honestly, I don't know how one would be able to read it all and still not believe that the Catholic church is the one true church. That's just me though, and I'm generally very simple minded.
[/quote]
That's the truth right there.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1274119408' post='2111978']
Some people like St. Anselm's argument too. Personally, I don't, but it's pretty awesome nonetheless. I almost feel like it was one big theological joke.
[/quote]

Here is the best representation of St. Anselm's Ontological argument. I think it is perfectly and logically sound. I don't see how it is a joke.



1) God is the greatest conceivable thing.
2) In order for God to be the greatest conceivable thing...he must exist not only as a concept, but also in reality. Otherwise, something greater can be thought of.
3) Nothing greater can be thought of than God.
---------------
God exists in reality.

[AudreyGrace]

i didn't speculate because each person's conversion experience is different. Reading awesome posts might be enough for one person, yet another might have to fully experience it themselves.

[Guest]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1274198812' post='2112775']
From a purely human level, it may be reasonable to reject Catholicism intellectually, after reading everything on here or even after reading the really great works of Catholicism.


Human reason is limited; it is not in accord with full and right reason to reject truth or a means to be perfectly happy for eternity.


Faith itself is a gift, Catholics do not believe in salvation through knowledge and thus I think cannot put intellectual rejection of the Church on the same level as true spiritual (best I can come up with) rejection of the Church.
[/quote]
Brilliant.

[Papist]

[quote name='morostheos' timestamp='1129418488' post='759658']
I voted I don't know because I can never know the disposition of any person's soul.

If one read everything on phatmass and was convinced that Catholicism was the fullness of the Truth, but still chose not to convert, then they are being unreasonable.

If they are not convinced, they are not being unreasonable.
[/quote]

Exactly why I voted, I don't know.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i'd say it should be assumed the person read and 'understood' what htey were reading, as far as arguments go. as far as 'truly getting it', that's what im asking. i'm not sure one should be making these distinctions between whetehr the person was 'convinced' versus 'being reasonable'.
i know plenty of people who aren't convinced of things, and yes i'd go so far as to say they are being unreasonable for it. what makes this issue special to say i'ts uncertain what to think unless they are convinced?