Any practising catholics here? (and do you follow the rules?)

Dave!

JCB wrote:

3) You believe that Jesus is present in the bread and wine you receive at Communion because of the power passed onto the priest through generations, uniting you with His sacrifice 2000 years ago.
- This defines whether you are Catholic/Orthodox or another christian denomination.

However, I feel from a Catholic perspective, you must agree with Point 3 (not exactly my wording of it, but the concept itself) otherwise you cannot call yourself Catholic, no matter how conservative you are.

Interesting post in general, and I'm willing to provisionally go along with the part I quoted. The Catholic Church believes that the bread and wine is LITERALLY -- not metaphorically or figuratively -- changed into flesh and blood, right?

Of you 'practising catholics' out there -- how many of you believe that that ACTUALLY happens? Wafers and vino are changed into human flesh and human blood?

Fad

actually your parents can easily force religion on you, also my grannies will NEVER talk to me again if i openly admitted my beliefs to them but however, ive learned to be subtle around them about it

Dudess

nlgbbbblth wrote:

A letter to the Archbishop of Dublin, Desmond Connell had to be written. In addition I had to have four separate meetings with a local priest in Rat-mines (whom I had never met hitherto as I don't go to mass) along with completing a detailed questionnaire in which I had to pledge that 'I would do my utmost to bring any children up as Catholic'.

End result: My son was christened in the Church of Ireland.

Any regrets?

Crucifix

JCB wrote:

There has been a lot of comments about moral issues (contraception, abortion etc...) defining one's religion
i.e. if you agree with homosexuality etc... then you are definately NOT a Catholic or else you are a hypocrite and should choose another faith.

Moral issues should not be the defining feature...

...4) You believe that the Pope is in direct succession from St. Peter, the first Pope, and is God's representative on earth.
- This primarily defines whether you are Catholic or Orthodox (plus a few other things)

Surely part of accepting the Pope as God's representative on earth is Papal infallibility? And in that case, I think the moral issues do become defining.

Spyral

Tough sh*t if you don't find it easy! The catholic church forbids it. If you're not willing to follow the rules, leave the catholic church.

You appear to be as selective as any other a la carte catholic.

I was just pointing out that its not easy as he seems to imply that blindly obeying like a zombie is easy. Yes it is, but I don't blindly obey.Neither do many 'modern' Catholics. And brother do not tell me I have a splinter in my eye when there is a plank in your own. Become the Pope and then maybe you can tell me what to do.
I follow church teachings and doctrines as best I can. Im not perfect I never will be but I make the effort to understand.

if you read what he wrote you'll see he only did it to please his parents and doesn't give a monkeys about the priest

he still lied. its not a matter of opinion or a judgement just a fact by his own admission. Regardless of giving a monkeys he vowed before God to do something while knowing he wouldn't which is the point I was making that if he doesnt beleive in God then why bother with what to him would be empty rituals ?

Of you 'practising catholics' out there -- how many of you believe that that ACTUALLY happens? Wafers and vino are changed into human flesh and human blood?

I do.

Dave!

Spyral wrote:

I do.

Really?

Sam Vimes

Spyral wrote:

he still lied. its not a matter of opinion or a judgement just a fact by his own admission. Regardless of giving a monkeys he vowed before God to do something while knowing he wouldn't which is the point I was making

Its very obvious that he lied. He said so right there in his post. It wasn't necessary to point it out.
I take it to be a judgement

Spyral wrote:

that if he doesnt beleive in God then why bother with what to him would be empty rituals ?

....emmm, to please his parents....?
I thought we'd mentioned that

nlgbbbblth

Spyral.

You seem to be missing the point here.

My reason for getting the dispensation was to placate parents, particularly my mother whose brother is a priest and she requested that he play a minor part in the church service. He would not have done so if there was no dispensation.

'Do my utmost....' is not the same as saying 'I will definitely....'

Have you seen A Love Divided?

Dudess
No regrets. Most people I discussed this with said I shouldn't have bothered getting a dispensation but I had my reasons and didn't not wish to upset my parents.

I found the attitude of the Catholic church in this matter somewhat overbearing.

As my wife attends church occasionally and I do not, it makes sense for her to raise our son in her faith.
When he is old enough he can make his own decisions.

JC 2K3

JCB wrote:

Just a quick question, if the church said that condoms, divorce and homosexuality were actually grand, would you come flocking back to mass in the morning?

No, in that case us atheists just wouldn't have a problem with the Catholic church besides the fact we'd find it baffling how one could believe in somehting with no evidence.

As it stands, you're believing in something with no evidence that, in the views of myself and many others, stands for ridiculous, deluded and insane practices, even if they generally aren't taught strongly these days.

Spyral wrote:

I said IN PRACTISE sure the actual device might be 98% phyiscally effective but they must be used ALL the time (which doesnt happen) and then in practise 15% failure rate..

Yes, but anyone who is responsible and not careless needent worry.

I reckon a lot less than 85% of sexualy active people are actually careful enough(see PI for details), which means condoms actually seem rather effective tbh.

Spyral

JC 2K3 wrote:

I reckon a lot less than 85% of sexualy active people are actually careful enough(see PI for details), which means condoms actually seem rather effective tbh.

I think you mean 'a lot more' Im just using the stats I have. It doesn't bother me people can do their own thing.

Spyral.
You seem to be missing the point here.

My reason for getting the dispensation was to placate parents, particularly my mother whose brother is a priest and she requested that he play a minor part in the church service. He would not have done so if there was no dispensation.

'Do my utmost....' is not the same as saying 'I will definitely....'

I understand the need to placate parents but doing lying about some thing because its the easiest way out isn't the way forward ya know?

JC 2K3

No, I did indeed mean a lot less.

People, in general, are idiots.

CathyMoran

We are married but we still use condoms sometimes, getting pregnant at the moment would be disasterous for me as I am recovering from chemo and major surgery. I really do not think that God would want us to abstain. As I have said before I would consider myself a practicing Catholic with caveats.

Dudess

CathyMoran wrote:

I really do not think that God would want us to abstain.

If God is compassion and love, then I would not think so either. However, the catholic church would - that's my point.

As I have said before I would consider myself a practicing Catholic with caveats.

I'm sorry Cathy but that's called being an a la carte catholic - essentially it's hypocritical. It's inconsistent to pick and choose what you want and don't want.

Terry

So, Dudess, essentially what you are saying is that only people who follow every single aspect of Catholicism are true catholics.
I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who attend mass to celebrate every single holy day/ saints day outside of the Vatican or those who strictly practice the orthodox teachings.

Spyral

If God is compassion and love, then I would not think so either. However, the catholic church would - that's my point.

Its not if God loved you, God does love you but you should respect him by not using contraception and if you want to have sex practice Natural Family Planning or absain.. no one died from not having sex.

Dudess

Terry wrote:

So, Dudess, essentially what you are saying is that only people who follow every single aspect of Catholicism are true catholics.

Yes. And those people exist - granted, they're of much older generations (the youngest probably being born in the '40s). I agree, society has changed, but the dogma of the catholic church doesn't seem to have followed suit. Its rules are still the same, therefore they have to be followed if you are a member.

Tar.Aldarion

Terry wrote:

So, Dudess, essentially what you are saying is that only people who follow every single aspect of Catholicism are true catholics.
I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who attend mass to celebrate every single holy day/ saints day outside of the Vatican or those who strictly practice the orthodox teachings.

Yes, but that doesn't matter. It's still a fact. There may be 1 catholic or a million but these orthodox poeple will not consider the other people to be Catholics. They are Christians yes, not Catholics.
Outside of Ireland there are a lot more of these orthdox people.

5uspect

OP, I think you'll find that the vast majority of people in the world are "a la carte" when it comes to their religious convictions. People pick and chose their morality and beliefs as society changes. It just goes to show that religion is really just a function of society rather than the other way around.

Anyone that adheres (religiously?:) ) to the Bible, or whatever bronze age scribblings they want, are by defintion fundamentalists. Fortunately most people don't and subscribe to the a la carte approach. Anyway there are so many contradictions in the bible et al that I don't know how these fundies don't just explode... hmmm...

CathyMoran

Dudess wrote:

If God is compassion and love, then I would not think so either. However, the catholic church would - that's my point.


I'm sorry Cathy but that's called being an a la carte catholic - essentially it's hypocritical. It's inconsistent to pick and choose what you want and don't want.

I disagree, God is not visibly down on earth at the moment but he would have compassion for those who through no faults of their own can not obey things (which I do not think are fundemental tenants of the church in the first place). Contraception as it is today was not around when Jesus was on earth, I am sure that he might have had a different view if he had seen what is around today. I am content to be described as an a la carte catholic if that is what you want to call me but I am still a catholic. Those who condemn my views and those like me, are not true catholics in my opinion as they lack compassion.

And to Spyral - sex is an important part of a marriage, there is no way that I would abstain from it - without sex there is no marriage in my opinion - you would have to be married to know that but sex is essential for bonding and keeping a marriage alive.

JC 2K3

CathyMoran wrote:

I disagree, God is not visibly down on earth at the moment but he would have compassion for those who through no faults of their own can not obey things

emm... who are you to speak for God?

CathyMoran

JC 2K3 wrote:

emm... who are you to speak for God?

I meant to say that "I imagine that"

JC 2K3

I see.

I have to ask though, why do you desire the label "catholic" when you clearly aren't one?

CathyMoran

JC 2K3 wrote:

I see.

I have to ask though, why do you desire the label "catholic" when you clearly aren't one?

I would consider myself to be one, just because I am a liberal, I would subscribe to the Jesuit view of catholicism, you can disagree with the church but still agree with the fundamental tenants.

watna

I'm not a Catholic so I guess the argument isn't the same for me, but I really don't see the problem with not agreeing with everything you are taught to believe in. That would make us all robots. Religion, whether you believe in it or not is designed to morally guide people. I'm not religious and don't really go to church but i consider myself to be quite moral and try to live a good life. if a religion helps you to live better and make the world a better place then who cares if you only take bits and pieces of the religion, Catholic or not. Everybody has other influences to shape their beliefs besides religion so it is a bit much to expect people to agree with everything that a religion dictates. As far as I'm concerned we don't know for definite that heaven exists but we know that we are here, so why don't we try and make the world as nice as possible now?

MooseJam

I'm an atheist, I believe anyone who believes in god is stupid

Terry

MooseJam wrote:

I'm an atheist, I believe anyone who believes in god is stupid

So an intolerant athiest then?

Whatever gets you through the day.

JC 2K3

CathyMoran wrote:

I would consider myself to be one, just because I am a liberal, I would subscribe to the Jesuit view of catholicism, you can disagree with the church but still agree with the fundamental tenants.

I don't know much about the Jesuits, but that just sounds like a form of Protestantism to me.

ie.
Fundamental Tenants = Christianity
Church = Catholicism

If you disagree with the church but agree with the fundamental tenants, you disagree with Catholicism and therefore are not a Catholic, yet are still a Christian.

JC 2K3

Terry wrote:

So an intolerant athiest then?

Whatever gets you through the day.

Thinking someone's stupid isn't intolerance.

Terry

I beleive it is.
The billions of people around the world who believe in some form of higher power can't all be stupid people.
Refusing to acknowledge that is, in my opinion, intolerant.

MooseJam

Terry wrote:

So an intolerant athiest then?

Whatever gets you through the day.

not at all, I'm very tolerant, I'm very tolerant of stupid people