Many Catholics 'do not believe' church teachings

Run_to_da_hills

Conor30 wrote: »

OK but look at America. There are so many 'pastors' over there who have their congregations in a frenzy, while they themselves are falling over themselves with money! Religion can be big business, if you play the game right! And what about 'House of Prayer' in Ireland too - that seems very lucrative! And some other non-Christian religions are also very wealthy.

Christianity began as a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. When it went to Greece it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome it became an organization. When it spread throughout Europe it became a culture. And when Christianity came to America it became a business.

Matthew 7:22-23 reveals that many false prophets do exploit the NAME of Jesus and will thus suffer the consequences.

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Brer Fox

I think that the reason many Catholics don't accept or believe key things is because it has never really been properly offered/explained to them. I think there is a real problem of 'cultural disbelief', or, more simply, cultural Catholicism, which means that you don't have to believe things in order to be considered Catholic.

I know several Catholics who believe there should be women priests and that the Church is wrong about sexuality. Doesn't sound very Catholic to me, but there you are.

It strikes me as odd that some of those with the most strident opinions will, in the next breath, admit to knowing very little about the faith. But in their ignorance they are happy to propose sweeping and radical changes to the faith.

crosstrainer1

Over the past 10 years ive noticed that more and more people belive that the catholic church which claimed to be gods only church has taught one set of rules and lived by another. In Ireland we are sick of the abuse cover ups, most people feel that religion is about control not salavation. i myself read the bible and the cathloic church does not repersent the jesus in the bible.

HamletOrHecuba

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Christianity began as a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. When it went to Greece it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome it became an organization. When it spread throughout Europe it became a culture. And when Christianity came to America it became a business.

Matthew 7:22-23 reveals that many false prophets do exploit the NAME of Jesus and will thus suffer the consequences.

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

And yet there is a strong possibility that through Pythagoras who lived in the middle east for a long period of his early life that the beliefs of the Old Testament Church were incredibly influential on Greek Philosophy; "What is Plato but Moses speaking Attic Greek?" as Numenius of Apamea went so far as to say. There are many implications on all levels of life and knowledge in what Scriptures and it is the duty of Christian philosophy to work these out- otherwise you will have the situation so common in our own day where someone might indeed believe in or at least give lip service to God and His Holy Scriptures while holding philosophies at odds with their revelation thus creating all sorts of inconsistencies and confusions in both thought and action.

While it is true that the Roman Catholic organization has become an end in itself, therefore separated from God, therefore a tool of the coming Antichrist, and that this did not happen over night with Vatican II but began as a slow process centuries before St Paul clearly outlines a hierarchical structure to the Church in his letters.

HamletOrHecuba

Brer Fox wrote: »

I know several Catholics who believe there should be women priests and that the Church is wrong about sexuality. Doesn't sound very Catholic to me, but there you are.

Than they simply arent Catholics, you could argue that they are not even Christians because Scripture is very clear on this issue.

I wouldnt worry about those types; I would worry more about people who have at least some desire to be with God but get caught up in things designed by the devil to misled them subtly such as the whole sordid "Divine Mercy" affair where the previously condemned with very good reasons writings of an unfortunate nun have been put on a pedestal. I would worry about the followers of the "House of Prayer".

Keylem

crosstrainer1 wrote: »

Over the past 10 years ive noticed that more and more people belive that the catholic church which claimed to be gods only church has taught one set of rules and lived by another. In Ireland we are sick of the abuse cover ups, most people feel that religion is about control not salavation. i myself read the bible and the cathloic church does not repersent the jesus in the bible.

The Church is made up of over 1 billion members, and a handful of men betrayed the gospel by engaging in cruelty and coverups. There were sinners as well as saints in the Church from it's earliest days right up to the present day, and will do so till the end of time. The Church has always condemned abuses introduced by it's members.

Cardinal Journet:

"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood." (Acts 20:28).

philologos

HamletOrHecuba: Plato's writings advocate a number of things which would be opposed to the Gospel, such as having "collective wives" being advocated in his Republic. I agree that Plato was an influential writer, but I don't think we should conflate Christianity with pagan writings.

On a general note: I think we need to separate the possibility of rejecting a particular denomination or institution from rejecting the Gospel. Just because a particular institution has screwed up royally, it doesn't mean that God has screwed up royally. Actually, it would point me to the inherent fallibility of man. It demonstrates more and more that the only person I can truly trust, is Jesus. The only name through which man can be saved (Acts 4:12).

It teaches me all the more, that mere religion and piety won't save me, that the works of my hands won't save me, my money won't save me, my family and friends as brilliant as they are ultimately won't save me, relationships won't save me, my ego and confidence won't save me. Ultimately, only Jesus can save from sin, and He is our King, we are called to serve Him. We're utterly helpless without Him, even with "religion".

Denomination or no denomination. Whether or not you believe in God or not, whether or not you follow others gods, whether or not you go to church or not, whether or not you pray and do externally pious deeds. The only thing that matters is your faith and belief in Jesus and Him alone.

Personally, I advocate Christian community arising through grassroots. People who long to know more about Jesus, setting up church communities and living as the early Christian church did. Being a catalyst for change and evangelisation in society. Instead of clinging and gripping blindly to institutions and screaming at societal change, Christianity needs to be an active force within society.

getz

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Than they simply arent Catholics, you could argue that they are not even Christians because Scripture is very clear on this issue.

I wouldnt worry about those types; I would worry more about people who have at least some desire to be with God but get caught up in things designed by the devil to misled them subtly such as the whole sordid "Divine Mercy" affair where the previously condemned with very good reasons writings of an unfortunate nun have been put on a pedestal. I would worry about the followers of the "House of Prayer".

are you saying woman in the early christain church did not preach ? and jesus did not tell all his disciples[one which was mary magdalene]to go out and spread the word of god ?

Brer Fox

Hamlet, what is wrong with Divine Mercy?

Are you not Catholic? I thought you were from reading your posts.

HamletOrHecuba

Brer Fox wrote: »

Hamlet, what is wrong with Divine Mercy?

Are you not Catholic? I thought you were from reading your posts.

I will find the reasons given officially why Catholics are banned from reading the writings of poor sister Faustina. I know John Paul took away the ban and even made her a saint, but the objections are still valid and like so much of his Pontificate his actions in this regard are of doubtful legality, and even if they were perfectly legal they would not be just.

From the her book....

“And know this, too, My daughter: All creatures, whether they know it or not, and whether they want to or not, always fulfill my will… My daughter, if you wish, I will this instant create a new world, more beautiful than this one, and you will live there for the rest of your life.”

Page 247.

If all creature fulfill the will of God what right has he to judge them? Here we have the most extreme form of Calvinism.

“The moment I knelt down to cross out my own will, as the Lord had bid me to do, I heard this voice in my soul: From now on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.”

On page 168.

Come on now.

HamletOrHecuba

Brer Fox wrote: »

Are you not Catholic? I thought you were from reading your posts.

The organizational earthly element of the Church is necessary- but it is not the essence of the Church, once it becomes divorced from that essence it becomes a danger. The murder of Christ you could argue was canonical, the Antichrist also will be canonical probably.

gimmebroadband

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

From the her book....

“And know this, too, My daughter: All creatures, whether they know it or not, and whether they want to or not, always fulfill my will… My daughter, if you wish, I will this instant create a new world, more beautiful than this one, and you will live there for the rest of your life.”

Page 247.

If all creature fulfill the will of God what right has he to judge them? Here we have the most extreme form of Calvinism.

“The moment I knelt down to cross out my own will, as the Lord had bid me to do, I heard this voice in my soul: From now on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.”

On page 168.

Come on now.

You will find explanation of the quote you mentioned at the following link. It's easy to misrepresent when taken out of context.

http://thedivinemercy.org/news/story.php?NID=3063

Conor30

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Than they simply arent Catholics, you could argue that they are not even Christians because Scripture is very clear on this issue.

Not at all! The Anglican Communion and many Protestant Churches allow women priests and pastors. And they're Christian, last time I checked. There wouldn't be anything 'unCatholic' about allowing women priests. It just wouldn't reflect traditionalist Catholicism. What has always been done isn't necessarily right. The Early Church allowed married priests, for example.

As for sexuality, a whole plethora of opinions is out there, depending on which denomination you ask. Besides, Scripture isn't always clear and interpretation is everything anyway. The various Christian Churches can come away from the same Scripture with very different interpretations, and these interpretations then inform their differing doctrines.

Doc Farrell

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

While it is true that the Roman Catholic organization has become an end in itself, therefore separated from God, therefore a tool of the coming Antichrist,

My concern, when I read a post like this on a public forum, is that younger minds or unstable minds or lonely people who are suffering and come to a Christian forum looking for help, might actually read the above sentence and think that it has merit. In doing so they might do further damage to their own peace of mind, causing further pain in their own lives.

What the poster is saying above is that the hundreds of thousands of Catholics around the world who help the broken, the sick, the dying, the homeless every day of their lives are, in his words 'a tool of the coming Antichrist'. This kind of language, on a Christian forum, is very disturbing.
What value has a Christian forum if sentences like the one quoted are considered acceptable? If I were to swap the words Roman Catholic for any other religion or denomination I would be, rightfully, considered a bigot.
For those who may be uninformed, the Roman Catholic Church is not confined to a mysterious Dan Brown type clergy in the Vatican but to All the people around the world baptized into the church who are doing the best that they can.
I'm hoping that since the other post was not deleted, that the same courtesy will be afforded to this one....
Finally, my advice to anyone who considers the Roman Catholic Church to be the tool of the Antichrist is to simply talk to real Catholics involved in groups that help others and you will find that they are, in reality, sane and decent.

joseph brand

Conor30 wrote: »

That's as maybe, but it's more of a identifying label than a faith for most people. They are just not bothered thinking about it.

The Gospels and indeed the Bible as a whole, have been interpreted and misinterpreted by so many different 'Christians' to suit their own agenda. Pared down to the very basics, yes, there might be a positive message there. But how many Christian religions are truly Christian? I'm sure Jesus would wince at most the organised religions we have nowadays.

I'm not surprised by the IPSOS findings, published in the IT. There is no rationale for choosing any church over any other, simply because religion is, by definition, in spite of logic and reason.
Thus there is no obvious reason for changing church just because one no longer agrees with some or all its tenets. These people still go under the label of 'Catholic' or 'Protestant' or whatever.

My folks are religious. Mother doesn't attend mass, father does. Both pray every night. They don't know much about the bible, but they just feel that there must be something else. They really want heaven to be real but there's no reason to think it exists, it's just blind faith. Coupled with the fact that indoctrination began when they were babies and continued all through school and church.

Most of us in this country 'chose' our religion when we were still suckling from our mothers. Hardly an informed decision on our part. Plus geography played it's part too.

A person changing from one religion to the next just proves that it's all a matter of taste; i.e. which one suits you more. If one religion is analogous morally, to your innate morals, then it will seem like a good choice. It's not factually correct but maybe you enjoy it's moral teachings, no matter how crazy they seem to anyone else.

HamletOrHecuba

Doc Farrell wrote: »

My concern, when I read a post like this on a public forum, is that younger minds or unstable minds or lonely people who are suffering and come to a Christian forum looking for help, might actually read the above sentence and think that it has merit. In doing so they might do further damage to their own peace of mind, causing further pain in their own lives.

What the poster is saying above is that the hundreds of thousands of Catholics around the world who help the broken, the sick, the dying, the homeless every day of their lives are, in his words 'a tool of the coming Antichrist'. This kind of language, on a Christian forum, is very disturbing.
What value has a Christian forum if sentences like the one quoted are considered acceptable? If I were to swap the words Roman Catholic for any other religion or denomination I would be, rightfully, considered a bigot.
For those who may be uninformed, the Roman Catholic Church is not confined to a mysterious Dan Brown type clergy in the Vatican but to All the people around the world baptized into the church who are doing the best that they can.
I'm hoping that since the other post was not deleted, that the same courtesy will be afforded to this one....
Finally, my advice to anyone who considers the Roman Catholic Church to be the tool of the Antichrist is to simply talk to real Catholics involved in groups that help others and you will find that they are, in reality, sane and decent.

An organization that shields child abusers is not a tool for the coming Antichrist? Im talking about an organizational structure and NOT the Church- you dont seem to be able to take on board they are not necessarily the same thing. Which again shows the importance of having a proper philosophy.

Also do you not think that the Antichrist will not help people? Did not that the Soviet Union do so much for its citizens' lives?

HamletOrHecuba

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Finally, my advice to anyone who considers the Roman Catholic Church to be the tool of the Antichrist is to simply talk to real Catholics involved in groups that help others and you will find that they are, in reality, sane and decent.

The Church in its essence can never be a tool of the Christ for it is the immaculately pure bride of Christ- however the organizational structures that usually govern the Church can be subverted, and they have been subverted. The Antichrist will bring peace and plenty to the world- the peace and plenty that Christ refused to give.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT9xRMwXaZI

Conor30

joseph brand wrote: »

My folks are religious. Mother doesn't attend mass, father does. Both pray every night. They don't know much about the bible, but they just feel that there must be something else. They really want heaven to be real but there's no reason to think it exists, it's just blind faith. Coupled with the fact that indoctrination began when they were babies and continued all through school and church.

Most of us in this country 'chose' our religion when we were still suckling from our mothers. Hardly an informed decision on our part. Plus geography played it's part too.

A person changing from one religion to the next just proves that it's all a matter of taste; i.e. which one suits you more. If one religion is analogous morally, to your innate morals, then it will seem like a good choice. It's not factually correct but maybe you enjoy it's moral teachings, no matter how crazy they seem to anyone else.

Great post. But if that's what keeps your parents happy and helps them get through life, which is hard enough, then good for them!

philologos

Conor30 wrote: »

Great post. But if that's what keeps your parents happy and helps them get through life, which is hard enough, then good for them!

I think the question is, irrespective of what "helps people get through life", what is true? - The truth is important, and depending on what is true, it can have clear consequences for our lives. Particularly if a sovereign God has spoken into the world and shown us about Himself.

This is when it stops being about what "helps people get through life" and starts being about what is true, and why does it matter.

Conor30

philologos wrote: »

I think the question is, irrespective of what "helps people get through life", what is true? - The truth is important, and depending on what is true, it can have clear consequences for our lives. Particularly if a sovereign God has spoken into the world and shown us about Himself.

This is when it stops being about what "helps people get through life" and starts being about what is true, and why does it matter.

Fair enough, and that's your view, but you seem to be talking more about 'shoulds' than what is actually the current reality for many Irish Catholics. I thought this thread was about an article in the Irish Times, where it was found that many Catholics, rightly or wrongly, don't believe in all of the dogmas and doctrines of the RC Church. For me, the thread is just about a look at how ordinary people consider themselves 'Catholic' and in what way.

Rather than focusing on an 'ideal', which is a very Catholic pursuit I might add, I think it's interesting to explore how everyday Catholics deal with being Catholic and what that means to them.

philologos

Conor30 wrote: »

Fair enough, and that's your view, but you seem to be talking more about 'shoulds' than what is actually the current reality for many Irish Catholics. I thought this thread was about an article in the Irish Times, where it was found that many Catholics, rightly or wrongly, don't believe in all of the dogmas and doctrines of the RC Church. For me, the thread is just about a look at how ordinary people consider themselves 'Catholic' and in what way.

Rather than focusing on an 'ideal', which is a very Catholic pursuit I might add, I think it's interesting to explore how everyday Catholics deal with being Catholic and what that means to them.

The shoulds are what matter I think. The ideal, is important, particularly if the ideal has to do with who this God is.

You seem to be implying that Irish Catholicism is atheism in religious trappings more than about a living faith in Jesus. That's quite a sad reflection isn't it?

The problem with the POV you're describing is that it rejects the view that we can know anything true about Jesus, or about God. If we can come to know what is true about God, then it stops being about "what gets people through life" and more about a living relationship with Him.

The former is me-centred, in a sense a me-centred religion. The latter is a God-centered religion.

Do you see what I mean?

Conor30

philologos wrote: »

The shoulds are what matter I think. The ideal, is important, particularly if the ideal has to do with who this God is.

You seem to be implying that Irish Catholicism is atheism in religious trappings more than about a living faith in Jesus. That's quite a sad reflection isn't it?

The problem with the POV you're describing is that it rejects the view that we can know anything true about Jesus, or about God. If we can come to know what is true about God, then it stops being about "what gets people through life" and more about a living relationship with Him.

The former is me-centred, in a sense a me-centred religion. The latter is a God-centered religion.

Do you see what I mean?

Of course some Catholics and other Christians can know this and do indeed (to varying degrees). But I'm just discussing the article's findings and giving my own views on the topic based on my own life experiences.

philologos

Conor30 wrote: »

Of course some Catholics and other Christians can know this and do indeed (to varying degrees). But I'm just discussing the article's findings and giving my own views on the topic based on my own life experiences.

Indeed, that's what we're all doing

I'm just wondering a bit more about your reasoning.

Sonics2k

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

An organization that shields child abusers is not a tool for the coming Antichrist? Im talking about an organizational structure and NOT the Church- you dont seem to be able to take on board they are not necessarily the same thing. Which again shows the importance of having a proper philosophy.

Also do you not think that the Antichrist will not help people? Did not that the Soviet Union do so much for its citizens' lives?

A front for the Anti-Christ? No.

Just a group of powerful men who decided that rather than admit to the horrendous crimes committed by members of their organization and allow them to face the justice they deserved, decided to cover up the crimes for decades and let someone else handle the problems.

Nothing more than mean, nasty and horrible little men, who would rather their power remain than face the truth.

/ontopic
I'd say the survey is pretty accurate.
A good comparison would be to my own family, most of whom declare themselves as Catholics, but don't believe in transubstantiation, certainly don't take the vast majority of the Bible literally and don't really believe/follow the Dogmas of the Vatican.

Instead, like most Catholics in Ireland, they were raised to be Catholic, have a vague belief in God and spend most of their time carrying on as any other person does.

MrPudding

Conor30 wrote: »

Fair enough, and that's your view, but you seem to be talking more about 'shoulds' than what is actually the current reality for many Irish Catholics. I thought this thread was about an article in the Irish Times, where it was found that many Catholics, rightly or wrongly, don't believe in all of the dogmas and doctrines of the RC Church. For me, the thread is just about a look at how ordinary people consider themselves 'Catholic' and in what way.

Rather than focusing on an 'ideal', which is a very Catholic pursuit I might add, I think it's interesting to explore how everyday Catholics deal with being Catholic and what that means to them.

I have had a argument with my mother about this. We are from NI (I lived in Dublin for 8 years) and currently living near London. She is divorced, does not go to mass very often, supports contraception, has no issue with sex before marriage, does not believe in transubstantiation, sees no issue with homosexuals and thinks the current pope is a tosser. Still calls herself a catholic.

We had a bit of a debate for the recent census, as I said I was not going to but her down a catholic, she freaked out! As it happens, it did not matter as there was no breakdown of christian faiths in the UK census. If I want to wind her up a bit I suggest she should try CoE.

Anyway, all this raises an interesting point, the old 84% catholic figure. Clearly, by the definition of the rcc, the 84% figure is complete garbage. Is there, or can there, be anything that can be done about that? Does it actually matter?

MrP

georgieporgy

It was never the situation at any time in the past 2000 years that all baptised catholics believed all that the church taught.

That was true of the twelve apostles for example. Judas had the whole story from the horse's mouth but failed to give his full assent to it.

So being baptised into the church merely means you have been baptised intio the church!

However, as baptism imparts real spiritual benefits on the recipient, the baptised individual is better able to understand spiritual truths than, say, an Alqaeda suicide bomber or an African witch doctor.

All that is required of the baptised individual is to renounce sin and adopt virtue. It's a completly free choice that each individual makes for himself and no amount of obfuscation of facts will do anybody any good.

georgieporgy

An example of a young man who did in fact take his baptism seriously can be seen in the attached video. It's graphic nature may disturb some so just read the text (and not play the video) if islam at work is too much for you (peace be upon them indeed).

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11798/graphic-video-tunisian-muslims-slaughter-convert

MrPudding

georgieporgy wrote: »

An example of a young man who did in fact take his baptism seriously can be seen in the attached video. It's graphic nature may disturb some so just read the text (and not play the video) if islam at work is too much for you (peace be upon them indeed).

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11798/graphic-video-tunisian-muslims-slaughter-convert

Pretty disgusting, and not justified IMO, but Islam is just where christianity used to be. The difference is christianity evolved and realised they could. It get away with that kind of behaviour. Islam hasn't had to.

MrP

HamletOrHecuba

georgieporgy wrote: »

An example of a young man who did in fact take his baptism seriously can be seen in the attached video. It's graphic nature may disturb some so just read the text (and not play the video) if islam at work is too much for you (peace be upon them indeed).

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/11798/graphic-video-tunisian-muslims-slaughter-convert

Disgusting- however Im friends with Christians from Muslim countries (Iran, Egypt, Syria and Iraq) and while particularly the Egyptians have no great love for Islam they do see it at least in its majority more moderate forms as superior to what passes for a culture today in the modern west and north America. Also Islam contains pretty huge differences within it- so lets not tar all Muslims with the deeds of Wahabis or whatever.

Let us also remember that the oldest enemy of the Church is doing all it can at the moment to incite Christians to hatred Muslims by spreading all sorts of lies and distortions so that Christians will do their dirty work for them. Let us also remember the literally millions of this enemy's victims in Russia at the start of the last century- murdered because of the Christian faith.

Benny_Cake

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Let us also remember that the oldest enemy of the Church is doing all it can at the moment to incite Christians to hatred Muslims by spreading all sorts of lies and distortions so that Christians will do their dirty work for them. Let us also remember the literally millions of this enemy's victims in Russia at the start of the last century- murdered because of the Christian faith.

Again with the Jews, huh? Shameless.