Other Catholics

[hyperdulia again]

What do you make of certain Protestant groups (primarily those that spring from non-anabaptist origins in the sixteenth century), who are not especially anti-Catholic, but are not regarded by the Roman See as being "in communion" with it? I ask this, because I've undertaken a serious study of the Reformers and find myself more often than not agreeing with Luther's view of the sacraments and Calvin's (Augustine's?) view of predestination. As a result of this, I've thought it advisable to end my tenuous connection to Rome. This does not mean I think the Church headed by the Pope is apostate, satanic, or anything else like that, I think it is a fundamental and important part of the Universal Church, I just don't agree with some of its assertions about itself, and SOME of its theological conclusions, like:

1. The immaculate conception of Our Lady.
2. Her Assumption.
3. The Bible and Tradition being co-equal.
4. Papal/ecclesial infallibility.
5. The necessity (as opposed to the advisability) of an ordained priesthood.
6. The necessity (as opposed to the advisability thereof) of auricular confession.
7. The necessity of good works for salvation.

I guess that's it, it is all I can think of at the moment anyway.

[hyperdulia again]

And I'm not sure about the deuterocanonical books of the Bible. I have not yet been able to form an opinion.

[hyperdulia again]

“Strange as it may seem, it is still true, that those who fail to understand other churches than their own are not the people who care intensely about theology, but the theological dilettantes, eclectics, and historians of all sorts; while those very men who have found themselves forced to confront a clear, thoroughgoing, logical sic et non find themselves allied to each other inspite of all contradictions, by an underlying fellowship and understanding, even in the cause which they handle so differently and approach from such painfully different angles. But the cause, it may be, is nothing less than Jesus Christ and the unity of the Church.”
—Karl Barth


"Only in Christ are all things in communion. He is the point of convergence of all hearts and beings and therefore the bridge and the shortest way from each to each."
—Hans Urs von Balthasar

"The doctrine of justification by faith is in fact the great ecumenical doctrine."
—N.T. Wright

"I have read in Plato and Cicero sayings that are very wise and very beautiful; but I have never read in either of them: 'Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden."
—Augustine of Hippo

[Lil Red]

hyper, you continually have my prayers.

[hyperdulia again]

Why thank you.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

Hyper, the last time you posted here you talked of converting to Judaism. In the past you've also mentioned leaving the Catholic Church multiple times, and then returning.

It's great to have a passion for learning about other faiths and other churches, but it seems to me as if your desire for knowledge is causing you to be a little giddy and unstable in your spiritual life. I've noticed the same tendency in myself, when I read so much theology from so many sources that everything seemed to be formed of brilliant fragments rather than making a cohesive whole. And through it all my mind went racing...racing...

So I forbade myself to study anything other than the Our Father for three months. I devoted myself to that prayer, to meditating on it and going deeper into what it says. The Lord's Prayer became my compass, my ballast, my reference point. I think you need a similar thing.

One of the wonderful things about Catholicism is how it is all woven together like a wonderful intricate tapestry. How you can't amputate the hand without hurting the heart. If you remove those teachings that you listed from the Catholic faith, and then asked yourself whether you could still believe in the Real Presence - the source and summit of Christian life - the reply would have to be, "No." For how can it exist independently of an ordained priesthood, or with a priesthood that was considered 'advisable' rather than necessary? It just can't. And the same is true of all the things that you list. Tug at one, and the faith unravels.

That said, I have no prejudice against Protestants. I will pray for you.

[hyperdulia again]

I find Catholicism burdensome, this I've never made a secret of, but my spiritual life was not the point of the first post on this thread.

[Mateo el Feo]

It's always nice to see a post by hyper. Good to see you.

A couple personal reflections:

Two saints who dealt with the effects of the Reformation are St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Francis de Sales. I suppose there are more, but their words and example show individuals who are passionate about the Faith, who both explain/defend the Church's teachings, and work charitably to stamp out scandalous behavior of some of the clergy. Not surprisingly, clerical scandals (then and now) seem to be the time-tested method for those who wish to leave the Church and start making up new doctrines. Long story short: their writings/biographies may be a good place to start.

Speaking only of myself, I would respond to finding "Catholicism burdensome" by recounting on my own experience. Being Catholic can be burdensome when I'm buried in sin. Otherwise, it's a walk in the park.

[jeffpugh]

Also, if you're up for some heavy reading, try looking up stuff from Trent. I've heard some people say that Catholics have never really given Trent her crusade... hmmm... it's sort of coming about now though. Lutherens have signed some document on Justification... before that, there was dissagreement on the Catholic standing. Just a heads up.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='hyperdulia again' post='1435103' date='Dec 16 2007, 11:51 PM']What do you make of certain Protestant groups (primarily those that spring from non-anabaptist origins in the sixteenth century), who are not especially anti-Catholic, but are not regarded by the Roman See as being "in communion" with it? I ask this, because I've undertaken a serious study of the Reformers and find myself more often than not agreeing with Luther's view of the sacraments and Calvin's (Augustine's?) view of predestination.[/quote]

I grew up Lutheran and was strongly torn between Calvinism and Catholicism before finally committing to Rome. There are some Lutheran sects and obviously some Calvinists who are vehemently anti-Catholic, but I was never one of them either and hardly knew anybody who was. Regarding "in communion," the Catechism says the Church is in communion with all Christians. To believe in Christ is a grace from God that cannot be received outside of sharing some partial communion with His Church. Of course, only Catholics can be in full communion.

[quote name='hyperdulia again' post='1435103' date='Dec 16 2007, 11:51 PM']I just don't agree with some of its assertions about itself, and SOME of its theological conclusions, like:

1. The immaculate conception of Our Lady.
2. Her Assumption.
3. The Bible and Tradition being co-equal.
4. Papal/ecclesial infallibility.
5. The necessity (as opposed to the advisability) of an ordained priesthood.
6. The necessity (as opposed to the advisability thereof) of auricular confession.
7. The necessity of good works for salvation.

I guess that's it, it is all I can think of at the moment anyway.[/quote]

I take it these are some of the things you find burdensome. Probably what you're missing (and what a lot of people miss) is that all this theology and doctrine reveals something about God's Love for us. The Immaculate Conception and Assumption could just be things you read about in a book that a bunch of bishops have gotten together in a room and decided we should believe. Or they could reveal how God provides a perfect Mother for us, bringing us another step closer to the glory that Adam and Eve originally lost in the Fall.

I'm gonna re-word something that I just wrote over on one of Relevant's boards:

If you don't see that Catholicism is entirely centered around Christ, you haven't seen Catholicism. You have to look beneath the surface, obviously, because if you only look at doctrines and rubrics, you'll probably only see a religion (like most people). Sacraments, the Church, Scripture, Tradition, Marian devotion.... all this stuff is about meeting Christ and growing in a personal relationship with him. We can discuss or debate all the particular details, but in the end, if we miss how those particulars help us to better know and love Christ, then we've completely missed the point.

Edited December 17, 2007 by LouisvilleFan

[prose]

This was to someone by Mother Teresa, but I thought it fit here:

"Your longing for God is so deep and yet He keeps Himself away from you, He must be forcing Himself to do so — because he loves you so much — the personal love Christ has for you is infinite — The Small difficulty you have re His Church is finite — Overcome the finite with the infinite."

[prose]

.... dp

Edited December 17, 2007 by prose

[hyperdulia again]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1435333' date='Dec 17 2007, 04:53 PM']I grew up Lutheran and was strongly torn between Calvinism and Catholicism before finally committing to Rome. There are some Lutheran sects and obviously some Calvinists who are vehemently anti-Catholic, but I was never one of them either and hardly knew anybody who was. Regarding "in communion," the Catechism says the Church is in communion with all Christians. To believe in Christ is a grace from God that cannot be received outside of sharing some partial communion with His Church. Of course, only Catholics can be in full communion.
I take it these are some of the things you find burdensome. Probably what you're missing (and what a lot of people miss) is that all this theology and doctrine reveals something about God's Love for us. The Immaculate Conception and Assumption could just be things you read about in a book that a bunch of bishops have gotten together in a room and decided we should believe. Or they could reveal how God provides a perfect Mother for us, bringing us another step closer to the glory that Adam and Eve originally lost in the Fall.

I'm gonna re-word something that I just wrote over on one of Relevant's boards:

If you don't see that Catholicism is entirely centered around Christ, you haven't seen Catholicism. You have to look beneath the surface, obviously, because if you only look at doctrines and rubrics, you'll probably only see a religion (like most people). Sacraments, the Church, Scripture, Tradition, Marian devotion.... all this stuff is about meeting Christ and growing in a personal relationship with him. We can discuss or debate all the particular details, but in the end, if we miss how those particulars help us to better know and love Christ, then we've completely missed the point.[/quote]Some people will gladly take communion (sharing) with Christ as they understand Him over communion with the Pope any day (not to mention considering their baptism and faith in Jesus Christ as things sufficient to make them members of the Catholic Church, with or without the Pope's acceptance of this fact) and readily recognize a sharing with all other Christians irrespective of their opinions on peripherals (ecclesiology, mariology, etc).

I do not find the Immaculate Conception and Assumption burdensome, I find them unwarranted assertions (Biblically and only scantly witnessed in the Fathers), that can at the very best be held as a private opinion, not declared a truth necessary for salvation. Note these are not denials of Mary as New Eve, Mother of God and the Church, etc.

I believe every constituent member of the Body of Christ is "centered entirely around Christ" this includes the Church headed by the Pope (I fear Roman Catholic will be offensive, but cannot in good conscience call your ancient church, "the Catholic Church" as opposed to a part thereof). I don't need to be convinced of the sincerity of Catholic faith, or that the Roman Catholic Church is a Christian Church, if I needed to be convinced of these things I would not be raising my children Catholic (why? children need stability in their spiritual lives and the Catholic Church is a safe home for them). I simply, and really for the very first time in my life, find myself not believing many of its assertions about itself and its history.

[Socrates]

The problem is, when you reject the Church's teaching authority, whose authority do you turn to?
Your own? Whoever's teachings you find appealing or "tickle your ears"?

The problem is, everyone will have different teachings they do and don't like, and an everyman-for-himself theology soes not lead in unity but division and ultimately theological chaos (with everybody from new-agey liberal Episcopalians, to died-in-the-wool six-day-creationist fundies - and every conceivable variation in between.)

It would seem quite arrogant for you or I to consider ourself personally the ultimate arbitrator of theological truth.

And, as has been shown on here many times, the "sola scriptura" approach is not that of the Church, nor is it even Biblical.

Somehow, though, I suspect your real issue is not with the Assumption of Mary, etc., but with particular moral teachings of the Church. As someone pointed out, it is your sins that are burdensome, not the Catholic Faith. (And this is not singling you out, but applies to me or anyone else. In fact, my priest made a similar point in his homily last Sunday.)

[Deus te Amat]

[quote]6What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day,and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well," but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? [b]So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.[/b] Indeed someone might say, "You have faith and I have works." Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble. Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works. Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called "the friend of God." See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by a different route? For just as a body without a spirit is dead,[b] so also faith without works is dead[/b].[/quote]

From the book of James, Chapter 2, if you insist on following the route of Sola Scriptura.