Author Anna Quindlen has been in the news lately, promoting a new book called Lots of Candles, Plenty of Cake. She recently spoke with NPR's Terry Gross about a wide range of topics she covers in the book, including her recent decision to leave the Catholic Church. She summarized this decision by telling Gross:
The pedophilia scandals, the church's reaction to them, and their constant obsession with gynecology -- taken together at a certain point, it was probably two or three years ago, I said, 'Enough.' Every time I sit in the pew I ratify this behavior, and I'm not going to ratify it anymore.
I'm sure that Quindlen's words resonated with many. She's a gifted writer, and has undoubtedly put words to what others have thought when they make the decision to leave the Catholic Church. Like Quindlen, many people who abandon their Catholic faith still believe in God and still strive to be good, moral people; they choose to leave because they think that they will find these things they desire -- God, freedom, equality -- outside the walls of the Church. Such a move certainly fits in with popular cultural beliefs. Common wisdom states that the Catholic Church is a corrupt organization that places oppressive, unnecessary rules on its members. The way to find freedom, the thinking goes, is to ditch the institution and create a spirituality and moral code that works for you.
To modern ears, this all sounds right. But is it true?
As someone whose faith journey has gone in the opposite direction, I would encourage Quindlen, as well anyone else who has followed her path or is thinking of following it, to consider the following five questions before abandoning the Catholic faith:
1. Are you sure members of the Church hierarchy are worse than anyone else?
When people cite the pedophilia scandals as a key reason for abandoning the Church, I worry that they're setting themselves up for deep disappointment. The fact that priests abused children is an idea so horrific that one can hardly bear to think about it, and the fact that some bishops didn't take action to stop it is almost worse. But the chilling fact -- perhaps so chilling that we don't can't accept it -- is that this is not a problem with Catholic priests and bishops; it's a problem with human nature. A priest is no more likely to abuse a child than a male schoolteacher, and a bishop is no more likely to cover it up than a school administrator.
The problems may have seemed worse within the Church because it is a single, worldwide organization, so it's easy to link all the bad occurrences under one umbrella. But if, for example, all the nondenominational churches on the earth were part of a cohesive worldwide system, you would almost certainly see the same issues at the same rates. Instead of each instance being lost in the anonymity of disconnected communities, when they were all considered together it would seem epidemic.
Other organizations are no more safe for children than the Church -- in fact, based on personal experience, I believe they are now less safe. Thanks to the pervasive stereotypes about Catholicism, people are lured into a false sense of security when dealing with other organizations, and end up adopting the dangerous mentality that "it couldn't happen here."
2. Are you sure your faith life would be better outside of the Church?
Keep in mind that leaving the Catholic Church means leaving the sacraments -- sacraments with real power, which are not available outside of the Church that Jesus founded. If it brings you joy to commune with Jesus spiritually, how much better is it to commune with him physically as well? And how lucky are we to have the sacrament of confession, where you can unload all your burdens, hear the words "you are forgiven," and receive special grace to help you to be the morally upright person you strive to be?
Now, those who are considering leaving the Church may struggle with believing in the supernatural power of the sacraments (in which case I'd recommend checking out these resources). But even if that's the case, within the two-thousand-year-old Church is an unfathomable treasure chest of spiritual wisdom. We have the Rosary as well as all the other time-tested prayers of the Church. Then there are the lives of the saints, countless stories that offer an inexhaustible supply of information and inspiration about how to have a rich spiritual life. And of course we have a worldwide network of monasteries and convents, and all the great religious orders. I suppose it's possible to utilize some of these spiritual resources without being a practicing Catholic, but if you believe that they're good and helpful, why sever them from the source of their wisdom?
3. Are you sure the Church's teachings are wrong?
There is a pervasive sense in modern culture that whatever spiritual tradition places the fewest moral restrictions on its adherents is most likely to be right. This idea might feel good since it appeals to our natural desire for autonomy, and certainly it is accepted as an immutable fact by modern society. And so if a person follows the path of least resistance carved out by our culture, it would be easy to drift away from all these "oppressive" teachings of the Church, without ever pausing to ask:
But are they true?
Let's take just one example: The Church's crazy-unpopular prohibition against contraception. The Church says that it's neither good for individuals nor for society for couples to use artificial birth control. It's understandable that someone's first reaction upon hearing that would be to reject this wildly counter-cultural teaching. I know that when I first heard it, I thought it was one of the most backwards, bizarre ideas I'd ever heard. But when I took a closer look, I was shocked by the wisdom behind this thinking: I realized that contraception doesn't solve the problems its proponents claim it will solve. I discovered that it makes women lose control over their bodies. I thought of the women I've known who have had abortions, and realized that almost every single one of them were using contraception when they conceived. They had been told that it would be just fine to engage in the act that creates babies, even if they were sure they couldn't have a baby. Then, when they saw the two lines on the pregnancy tests, they felt trapped and scared, believing that they had no choices outside of the walls of the local abortion facility.
Living without artificial contraception has its challenges, but it's the only system that gives women real freedom. As with so many other Catholic teachings that seemed crazy at first glance, once I took the time to understand the details of this view, I saw that there was a wealth of wisdom behind it beyond anything I could have imagined. It had seemed crazy simply because our culture has it so wrong, and the Church is the last institution left that's willing to proclaim what's right.
4. Are you sure the Church's doctrines aren't divinely inspired?
In my own conversion to Catholicism I faced serious challenges, including the fact that I was diagnosed with a Deep Vein Thrombosis (blood clot in a major vein) which was caused by a genetic clotting disorder that's exacerbated by pregnancy. My doctors told me I absolutely had to use contraception. It threw me into a crisis where I had to discern how serious I was about this religion, and how much I was really willing to risk to follow it.
Thanks to some wise advice, I realized that the situation was really quite simple: Is this Church guided by God in its teachings or not? If it's not, then there's no reason to listen to anything it says; if it is, then to say that I knew better than the Church was to say that I knew better than God.
When I looked at the unfathomable body of wisdom contained in this organization, considered that it has stood strong while empire after empire has fallen away around it, and saw that it has been unwavering in its core doctrines despite the imperfections of its hierarchy, I simply didn't think that humans could pull this off on their own. Then, when I began to transform my life according to these teachings, I was completely convinced. Following the "rules" of the Church brought an explosion of grace and peace and love into my life, and into my family's lives as well. I became convinced that these teachings are not human-made, but come from Someone who knows us better than we know ourselves.
5. Are you sure we don't need the Church?
At the end of the NPR interview, Quindlen says, "I've never really gotten past that quote from Anne Frank in her diary, where she says that people are really good at heart." I too have always been touched by that quote, and I think it's worth putting some serious thought into. Because if it's true that people are ultimately good at heart...then that means that the staff who worked at Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen, lining up children in front of the gas chambers, overseeing Anne Frank and her family in slave labor, were good at heart too. How on earth, then, could normal, good people participate in something so evil?
The answer is chillingly simple: Through the power of human rationalization.
To look at the smiling faces of the employees in these pictures of an on-site staff retreat at Auschwitz is to understand that they had all rationalized their behavior. Nobody ever wakes up and says, "I'm going to do something evil today!", not even the staffers at Auschwitz. The only way evil ever works through us is when we convince ourselves that what we're doing is actually good. The most dangerous force in the world is the human capacity for rationalization.
I think that some folks reject the concept of the Church's divinely-inspired moral code because they don't see why it would even be necessary. Why would God even care to institute something like that? Why can't each person just get in touch with the spiritual realm and find what's good and true for him- or herself? The answer to that question can be found in the smiles on the Auschwitz's employees faces.
Though the individual members of the Catholic Church have made plenty of mistakes, sometimes gravely serious ones, its doctrines have always been a bulwark that protects human life. To a healthy American adult this may seem like an insignificant concept, since the only life that is devalued in our time and place is that of the severely disabled, the unborn, and others who literally do not have a voice. But that could change. The zeitgeist could shift, just as it did in Europe in the 1930s, and new groups of people may suddenly be seen as inconvenient and expendable. And one day the life that the Catholic Church stands up for may be your own.
View Comments
Comments
Join the Discussion
It doesn’t matter if the Catholic Church hierarchy is worse than everyone else. It still remains that as an institution it is bad and has sanctioned too many bad things – pedophilia and the cover up; torturing people for their beliefs not their deeds; stealing property; condoning slavery; burning books; genocide; torture; suppressing science; and the list goes on. I choose not to be a member of any church which by its deed we have come to know how evil it has been.
Faith is not a virtue. Believing in something because someone else claimed to have had a revelation, or that they have a holy book, or upon their authority, or they report miracles, or simply because it has been a tradition is not a good way to find truth and reality. Faith is for those who have become as little children and have denied their own reason.
Sacraments are NOT an exclusive Catholic ritual. The following churches also have sacraments while, of course, denying the validity of other churches “so-called sacraments”. Anabaptist, Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, German Brethren, Lutheran, Polish National Catholic Church and Reformed Presbyterian all have sacraments. Likewise the Baptists and Pentecostals have them too but prefer to call them ordinances. Dozens of Oriental Orthodox churches have sacraments but the list is too long to name them. And finally the Mormons have the sacrament of the Last Supper. Who is to say that these sacraments are “invalid” and only the Catholic ones “valid”?
The Church prohibition against “artificial birth control” is NOT based on whether it is good or bad for individuals or society. The prohibition is there because the Church has declared that it is God’s will that every intercourse in marriage be “procreative and unitive”. And yet 90% of Catholics have used “artificial” birth control and many church leaders have voted for changes.
To be honest many other Catholic practices can be consider artificial and against nature if not just outright evil. Celibacy, antisemitism, arranged marriages, burning people alive, castrating singers for Vatican choirs, concubines for kings and Popes, exorcisms, flagellation like Saint Francis, genital mutilation, genocide, honor killings, indexing books, indoctrination, polygamy, raping boys and the cover up all the way to the Pope, scapegoating by sins can be borne by another’s suffering, sexual prohibitions that hurt no one, slavery like selling daughters, starvation or fasting, and penance for sins instead of restitution.
All of these things have been preached, practiced, and solemnly declared to be the will of God at one time or another throughout Catholic history.
The Catholic Church says that its doctrines are “divinely inspired”. I am not sure how that is any different from what ALL religions claim.
Most Catholics can plainly see that other religions are man-made, false, and certainly not divinely inspired. Catholics can plainly see that the Koran and Book of Mormon are not the Word of God and that the behavior of their religious leaders does not convince one that they speak for God. All religions offer the same evidence as proof - authority, a holy book, tradition, revelation, and miracles.
One does not need the Church to be a moral, good person. In fact, many people have needed the Church to be immoral persons. Certainly the Church has not done much for education, science, medicine, peace, or creating a better world outside of some nice art and a few hospitals (with heavy restrictions on what they can cure).
Catholics agree that all other non-Catholic religions are just useless superstitions but fail to see that the Catholic religion in all its varieties is also.
I fail to see how its doctrines against heresy and nonbelief been a bulwark that protected human life?
I grew up Catholic and to read history and the bible, it made me believe that the Catholic Church, the Vatican is such a cover up, it all started back in 1534 when Jesuits began, they killed so many Christians or Protesants, and to this day the vatican runs the world, and its more of an occult or satan, as it says in the Bible the Mother of all churchs, in time they will see that the who ever pope will run the religion of the world, all the other churchs will follow and pridict the Sunday is the day for Jesus, but Saturday is the true Sabbath and the true people that believe are believers of Jesus and the people that believe Sunday is the sabbath day will fellow the man, the Pope. The vatican and there Jesuits who are defendly in power. Jesus was a poor man and the Vatican is one of the riches organizations in the world. All they want now is power of the people,
Everywhere we turn there are feet of clay. Forgivable in the Christian religion….totally, but not so much when one portends a superior false sanctity as seems the case with this patriarchy. It all leaves one feeling wounded.
Sandra—your purpose in life is to save your soul. As a Catholic you have all the tools to do so—-the Sacraments. I have heard all of the things you mentioned throughout my life—but that is not going to deter me. Lived as long as you—heard it all! Will that stop me from fighting the “good fight”? No, because Christ died foe me—He wants my salvation, He wants me to make use of the gifts He gave through His church. Sure—there are bad priests, or bad examples—do you want them to defeat you? Because of them, souls will be lost, souls will spend eternity with Satan—(unless they fight). We must make use of the Church, priests, confession, Holy Communion, and the Last Sacraments—until our dying breath—because Our Lord offers them to us. We cannot win any battle easily—and fighting to save our soul is the best fight we can wage. You have done your part for your family, now focus on your soul. Say your rosaries, go to confession, communion—stay on course and pray for the peace that ONLY Our Lord provides. May God guide you.
Let me try and clarify Claire and Patt, the Catholic church, Jesus’s church are the people in it. They most certainly are not a joke. It is the institution itself the corporation composed of old and some young men who are cruel and certainly not Christlike. So no you are not a joke! I did not insult you or condemn you! We are God’s children and may worship and believe as you/we wish. Our Lord will punish those who caused us the most pain such as Sandra feels now. How sad.
Enough said I will not win any contest/points here posting in a Catholic blog for sure. I somehow ended up here/this website reading about the Borgia’s and Pope Alexander (Popes of the Renaissance Period) I believe his formal name (not sure) at the turn of the sixteenth century. He certainly was a piece of work. No wonder Luther and others left the faith and “Reformed It”.
Have a nice day everyone.
Claire—thank you. I do not like appreciate attacks on my Roman Catholic Faith, simply because someone wants to live an amoral lifestyle (homosexual or adulterous—the impression given). Usually such a person strikes out at any hinderance of their choice—choosing sin over faith and morals.
Next they join a church that welcomes and condones such behavior (they do not want to be judged, nor do they think they do any harm).
Following that they accuse, condemn, or name call—any religion (or person), that opposes them.
Nobody hates them, but they may hate themselves.
Again thanks Claire. I stand by my words with a clear conscience and am glad you saw what I was expressing. I am tired of those who strike out at the faith!!
As a cradle Catholic for 70 years, my peace is being taken away. In the 40’s & 50’s, we were not allowed on a public school playground;inside a basement of a protestant church to join girlscouts.Could not attend friend’s wedding in a non-catholic church & constantly berated if we attended a public school.Priest made home visits to check & I lived in guilt & shame because my Italian, Catholic parents were divorced.Priest more often than not have no time to listen, validate our struggles or minister to us.They keep telling us their roles have changed & we should fully cooperate with churches closing or combining due to economics. I do believe in conraception in very particular situations dealing with emotional or health. However, the Baltimore Chatechism states of one even believes in contraception, you may not receive sacraments.I belive confession is a sacrament;so where am I to turn. I do know & so do parish priests that young adults from 30-50 yrs old do not see this as a sin; but still plan their amt of children;are very active in their Catholic churches; are wonderful, caring parents and involved with helping people. My adult children & spouses all attended at least 12 yrs of Catholic education;& some of my older grandchildren are in Catholic Universities. Most of them have never heard of the Baltimore Chatechism. They are upset with me for being so guilt-ridden & missing a peaceful practice of my faith. I would never have used contraception before marriage;since we had no intimacy until after.I never would have provided it for my teenage daughters or believe in it ever for recreational sex as part of a date. I guess if you are all correct, I shall go to hell;I don’t plan on thinking of myself as a non-Catholic. My torment grows daily. Sandy
Dan, Patt is not afraid of people from other faiths, and she is not expressing vitriol. You came here and posted an inflammatory comment, calling the Catholic Church a joke and saying it had no clue about morality. Comments like that will generally not result in a warm and fuzzy response. I would say that if anyone is guilty of vitriol, it’s you.
Who are you trying to convince me or anyone who happens to read this blog Patt? Who among us has humility? Who loves all? Who judges not?
My Lord I thought people like I knew 50 years ago stopped hating and fearing others of different faiths. Your vitriol will amaze all who read your remarks ... I hope no one knows you on this blog. I’d be embarrassed.
God Bless
“If you do not eat my flesh and drink my blood—you shall not enter Heaven.”—They are found ONLY in the Catholic Church. And Christ warned about Hell—at least 17 times in the gospel If one does not follow what Christ has given us—they turn away from him to serve themselves. That is what Martin Luther and all who followed him do.
So why are we supposed to handle you with kid gloves and soothe you? You are a big boy—-you made your choice.
If I listed all sources for you to research and find your answers you would ignore them.
I am being AN HONEST CATHOLIC not your mommie, friend.
So pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance, I cannot help you, nor will I baby you.
No more responses from me.
Another loving Catholic I see ... do no harm please! 66 years in the Catholic church 16 years of Catholic education, 22 years most recently working in the diocese. I’ve tried all my life to do no harm. Those around who judge and condemn are what caused me to look to a more pure/forgiving Christian Faith. Do you have any clue of evilness and duplicitous behavior in the clergy over the past 2000 years especially in the cardinals and papacy. Please look at the history Patt.
Patt may you be less fearful of our loving God. God loves, we are the ones that judge ourselves at the time of our transition/death of the body ... not God
The truth shall set you free! John 8-32
God loves you I love you .. Peace
Obviously you have no clue to the teaching of the Catholic church. You accuse God of not knowing what is morally right… He only gave us the 10 Commandments on which morality is based. Next you claim the Protestant church you belong to has “sacraments”—-—uh—NO—it does not!
Your thinking seems to be the REAL JOKE—since you understand nothing about the Catholic Church.
Another Vatican II disaster…
do not bother to reply.
I left because I am tired of a church that for 2,000 years has no clue on what is morally right .. the real problem is though over the same 2,000 years they have tried to convince all in it’s fold they really do know. What a joke!
In the Episcopal church I have my sacraments. And I have a church that at least knows that it does not know all the answers. Pope Francis is a breath of fresh air but much too late.
Sexuality is more than a gift it is God Itself in male and female consciousness/souls. God is Love, God loves sexuality so “Do no Harm!” Sexuality with who/whom is not important Again the rule “Do No Harm!”
Sin is not in sexuality, sin is in harm, guilt, fear taught by those in control.
After the latest Papal comments (reported 9-19-2013) this is what I have to say while I ponder looking for a place that does not throw moral people under the bus: Apparently the Pope has not attended church in the U.S.A. or Western Europe. When was the last time anyone has heard preaching about chastity and waiting for marriage in church. Yes, we will hear about the “sanctity-of-life.” We had to leave our former church and find one that actually preaches on sexual purity, on protecting marriage, etc. I have told priests for years, that “social justice begins when men keep their zippers up and women their legs crossed until marriage - and then only with your spouse.” Most of the criminal activity comes from fatherless homes - cause the “sperm donors” do not take responsibility - and the gov’t can never meet such a need. Shame on the Pope. I remember in my Jesuit-runned High School how I had to defend orthodoxy in debates with the faculty - in and out of the “religion class.” It’s time that the Pope join in the fight against Moral-Phobia, not ignore it. Sexual sin is a main cause for social injustice.
Based on your pen name, I have a feeling that you’re not a good judge of what is in good taste.
“You are trading Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, Who wants to feed you with His Body and Blood so that you may have Eternal Life, for fellowship.”
To which I and Gordon Ramsey would reply “dry,bland, and tasteless.”
Adios Westboro
People leave the Church chiefly for one main reason…the Church does NOT accommodate their favorite sin. There is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood but there seems to be no shortage of vocations to be Pope. Everyone thinks they can and should do it. Sorry, not the way Christ set it up. The Truth is not so evident that it can be found without looking, but not so well concealed that it won’t be found by every single person who truly and sincerely seeks it. Do you really want the Truth? Do you think you can actually handle the Truth? Good luck…mGrby
I think some people expect the priests to be perfect. The priests are mere mortals that can commit sin. For every erring catholic priest there are thousands more leading exemplary lives, some of them saintly lives. I will never leave the Catholic Church.
Brilliant and accurate.
Claire S thanks for letting me know! I will definitely check it out. I too have a blog and would be honored for any readers to check it too. God bless! So much!!!
Mine is called “Catholicboyrichard” and is at http://catholicboyrichard2.wordpress.com. Again many thanks.
Richard, thank you for sharing your beautiful story. In case you haven’t heard, Simcha Fisher (who blogs for the NCR and also has a personal blog on Patheos) has a brother who is living a life of celibacy while experiencing same-sex attraction. His name escapes me at the moment, but he has a blog about his experiences. You could easily find him through Simcha’s blog if you’re interested.
I kind of “get this” from both sides. I was 35 years away, returned to Rome, and then for around 2 and 1/2 years vacillated between the Church and being an Episcopalian “catholic” Christian. Why? I am a same-sex attracted man who found myself looking more at the behavior of some within the Church than the Church itself. And wanting to be free from what at times seemed discriminatory, yet wanting to hang on to the basic Catholic beliefs. But it cannot be done.
All to say that compromise never works. Never. I still have deep empathy and concern for my LGBT friends and family, including my own share of painful experiences even as a celibate Catholic Christian, but I know there is no peace outside of the Church once you really know her in fullness, and I cannot escape the fact that, in 2006 at age 50, I was finally confirmed and the seal of the Spirit will not let me go—okay technically He will LET me, but by His Mercy He has more than once pulled on that “short leash” which I willingly let Him chain me with that day.
So I thank God so very much for the Sacraments, and for the Church He has given to us. And they are available nowhere else, not in “Catholic lite” Anglican/Episcopalian circles, not in Protestant Christian circles, and only in part through Orthodoxy.
And what I now once for all finally realize is,we can and even should be for the basic rights of all but do so without giving up the Faith in that process. And we do give it up if we leave. I pray that this woman will one day realize it and return, once for all. And I am glad I did.
The real problem is one the very first Pope had—when Jesus asked him to join in walking on the water,he looked down to the waves instead of standing firm on the water, and when we look away from Christ even for a moment we begin to sink as St Peter did. I just thank God that Christ was there to “catch” me, and more than once.
All to say—do not be too easy nor too hard on this woman. She needs, more than anything, our prayers. And I do not say that flippantly. We all look away from Christ at times.
As someone who was part of one of those more liberal religions where everything was permissible, I can say that I am so glad to be with the Church and nothing should change. Ever since Adam and Eve, it has been humanity’s nature to question everything and complain if they’re allowed. If you make the Church more democratic, then the Church will cease to exist for God’s will, and it will only exist for the will of the people. The Church is not Burger King; you cannot have it your way and I pray you never do.
@ Eric, you said “I will stick to my bible thank you and the fellowship I enjoy with so many believers.” That bible was given to you by Catholic Councils and Catholic Bishops.
Also, you said “I will not follow the false teaching of man. A church that told me I would go to hell because I missed mass on a Sunday seriously needs to review its teaching.” Mass is not like a football game or brunch with the ladies, “Is it not the participation of the body of Christ”? “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). This is a good reason NOT to miss mass, oui?
Lastly, “Jesus said to follow Him,I only say I don’t follow your churches teaching. I do not believe the RC church is divine but if we are all following Jesus we can share the bond of peace. At least God never changes and Jesus is the same yesterday today and forever.” Yes, Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever, so when He tells us through Peter, He is the head of His Church and upon this Rock/Peter He will build His Church, we should make a serious attempt at understanding what that means. Simply put “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Lk. 10:16).
Pray about it.
Stay in the fold. But raise hell.
Sandra—-what Joanp62 has mentioned is correct. Please do not get tangled up in being so scrupulous, that can lead to despair, which the devil wants one to do. Remember there are 3 conditions to make a sin mortal and there are many booklets explaining sin and its conditions. Your mother was not excommunicated if she did not want the divorce, and did not remarry. Additionally she had grounds for a divorce and annulment due to his affair… I think you must have gotten some incorrect information. I grew up in those times—and what you wrote sounds extremely severe and over the top. No Catholic goes to hell for attending a Protestant service, but if they leave the church for a Protestant replacement, that is a different story. I would suggest that you heed the great mercy our Lord expressed by Sister Josefa Menendez “THE WAY OF DIVINE LOVE”, or Sister Fastina’s diary—“DIVINE MERCY IN MY SOUL” Our Lord is most merciful but we must ask through prayer and the sacraments. Think of St. Dismas who died on the cross next to Christ—he knew he deserved the death he was getting, and that Christ was innocent. Dismas said, “Remember me, when you enter your Kingdom” and Jesus told him, “This day thou will be with me in Paradise”. That is Christ’s great mercy and love. May Our Lord settle your mind and grant you His holy peace.
Dear Sandra, since I wasn’t around in the 50’s, I wouldn’t know anything about the various restrictions you mentioned, although some of them were probably well-meaning. They also sound like perhaps some people were just being overly cautious, I don’t know. Being born in the early 60’s I have to say that those things were no longer going on.
With regard to your mother, did she remarry without getting an annulment? If she was simply divorced and single, as I am now,also not my wish, she would not have been excommunicated and if she was told that even by a priest, that was wrong. It is my understanding, even prior to Vatican II, that you could still receive communion if divorced as long as you were not in grave sin.
Artificial contraception is a serious matter, we are called to be chaste if we are not married, and within marriage we must be open to life and the Will of God in all things in our lives. However, the Church is aware that married couples may have need to space out their children, and we currently have very good natural methods of avoiding conception. The difference is the means used to avoid pregancy. NFP is about avoiding sex during fertile times, whereas the pill, condoms, etc., impede conception during intercourse. Big difference.
Regarding the “new” Gloria. Actually, the revisions to the prayers of the Mass in English are the more correct translations from the Latin. When the prayers were translated into English, it just wasn’t done very well. I know that in Spanish, they were always using the words that we are now using in English. Now, the English translation is more closely from the Latin. I wonder why you would think that the old Gloria was God’s words and the “new” Gloria is not.
Regarding man-made judgments. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus and it is here to preserve, protect and teach God’s Truth. The Church makes some pretty major claims, and I believe her. It claims that it has the fullness of Truth and that the Holy Spirit guides the teaching authority of the Church when teaching on matters of faith and morals. In other words, God does not expect us to have to figure out the important stuff on our own. The important stuff being how to get to Heaven ultimately. So He gave us a visible Church with His authority to guide us in all Truth. And regardless of how sinful the leaders and the rest of us may be, He will not let them teach error on those matters of faith and morals.
I would suggest that you not loose heart. Read the bible, especially the Gospels and the Psalms for starters and pray, pray, pray. Talk to God. Give all your concerns, your OCD and scruples to Him. Place yourself in His hands, and if you’re not sure of where to begin, just tell Him that you don’t know where to begin and ask Him to help you. And keeping asking. Tell Him you don’t even know what you need to grow closer to Him and He will show you.Ask him to increase your trust and confidence in Him. I know because I have experienced His help in overcoming many stumbling blocks. I will keep you in my prayers.
I am an over scrupulous person, with obsessive compulsive disorder. In relation to my being a cradle catholic, I am tormented with fear, shame & guilt. We were not allowed to join girlscouts because the meetings were held in BASEMENT hall of a protestant church. If you were not attending a catholic school, you better prove why. My mom who was divorced from my father (his wish, not hers due to an affair) was excommunicated. We were not permitted in 50’s to go onto a public school playground for a game after school.could not attend weddings in a protestant church. I have been confessing the worst sin of my life for over 35 years without comforting feedback. Now the new Gloria (not God’s words) says peace to people og “good will” (definition please. The rest of the mass is loaded with signs of peace to all people. Baltimore Chatechism states, if you believe in contraception even for a decent reason, you are not permitted to receive the sacraments. I am tormented by some man-made judgements & cry over these things that are not explained. After 70 yrs of being Catholic, I feel no hope in church;yet I believe in God’s mercy and his desire to bring even one lost sheep home with Him. How do I get peace & forgiveness from our Lord, if I cannot accept these stumbling blocks?
You are trading Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, Who wants to feed you with His Body and Blood so that you may have Eternal Life, for fellowship.
We stick to the Bible too, and we also enjoy fellowship. And Church teaching is not the false teachings of man. They are the teachings of God.
I will stick to my bible thank you and the fellowship I enjoy with so many believers. I will not follow the false teaching of man. A church that told me I would go to hell because I missed mass on a Sunday seriously needs to review its teaching. Jesus said to follow Him,I only say I don’t follow your churches teaching. I do not believe the RC church is divine but if we are all following Jesus we can share the bond of peace. At least God never changes and Jesus is the same yesterday today and forever.
Eric, the Catholic church is not a man-made religion or organization. It is the Church founded by Jesus beginning with His Apostles and is guided by the Holy Spirit when teaching on matters of faith and morals. We are all guided by the Holy Spirit if we let ourselves be open and docile to the Spirit, but God guides His Church in a special way so to preserve and preach His Truth.
The Church is both divine and human, and the fact that it is still here after 2000 years in spite of the sinfulness of her members means that there is more to it than merely human construct. To the best of my knowledge, no human organization has lasted so long.
Arrogant, arrogant and incredibly misinformed about Church teaching.
Sorry you all feel that way but the arrogance is a church that claims that the spirit only speaks to certain men and not to others. I speak with a heart of love and concern, I know full well that what I say will be attacked and if I avoided speaking out it would be that I am more concerned with the praises of men than of G-d. It just confirms Roman Catholics really do believe there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic church. Amen!
Eric, I don’t find your words to be challenging. The only thing I find challenging about your comments is the arrogance, ignorance, and the process of weeding through your run-on sentences. The Holy Spirit speaks through sacred scripture. Your interpretation is inherently flawed.
Posted by Eric on Sunday, Jul 7, 2013 7:04 PM (EDT):
“Jesus also said destroy this temple and in three days I will rebuild it. He was referring to his death and resurrection not the bricks and mortar.”
Exactly! Jesus means what He says. It’s not His fault if people thought He meant a building. He said this temple (his body) and in three days I will raise it up”. That is exactly what happened!
You then write: “He then asked Peter when followers were walking away as the teaching was so difficult knowing they couldn’t possibly eat His flesh and drink His blood, ’ Do you also want to go away?’ Peter replied ’ Lord to whom shall we go, you have the WORDS of eternal life.‘v67-68 This supports v63.”
It supports all of the 5 verses where Our Lord speaks of eating and drinking His flesh (real food) and His blood (real drink). Yes, many of His followers walked away because it was difficult for them to accept that they must eat His flesh. And did Jesus call them back? No. Why would He let them leave on account of a misunderstanding?? No. They understood Him correctly, as we Catholics do today.
Sorry, Eric, the very verses you bring up destroy your claim and build up the Catholic Church’s claim.
Incidentaly Martin Luther challenged the church on their interpretation of the bible, as have many other theologians, it is not arrogance, we are meant to expose error. It is the Holy Spirit who teaches and reveals the meaning not ‘me.’ I do not seek to offend, however I understand this is challenging to a Roman Catholic, I reacted the same way when I was confronted.
Jesus also said destroy this temple and in three days I will rebuild it. He was referring to his death and resurrection not the bricks and mortar. Referring to eating his body and drinking his blood was not meant literal. Drinking blood was forbidden. His word is food and drink to the spirit.Man does not live by bread alone but every word that proceeds from the mouth of G-d Deut 8: 2-3. He couldn’t emphasise enough eating His flesh and drinking His blood and gave the spiritual meaning later in v63 so I do not take one verse but the whole bible. Jesus was the word became flesh. There is also only one sacrifice read Hebrews 9:23-28. We celebrate the breaking of bread and drinking of wine in remembrance of Him. He then asked Peter when followers were walking away as the teaching was so difficult knowing they couldn’t possibly eat His flesh and drink His blood, ’ Do you also want to go away?’ Peter replied ’ Lord to whom shall we go, you have the WORDS of eternal life.‘v67-68 This supports v63. Jesus will build his church on the revelation of Christ not part of an institution. I understand how challenging this is when we are raised and indoctrinated as children in the RC teachings. I know Roman Catholics are devoted and we are all Catholics being universal but not Roman Catholics. The church is an organism of believers and we are not to trust or follow man…. We will agree to differ no doubt…. Blessings.
What you speak is not the truth. Catholics do not worship Mary. The Church does not discourage reading the Bible, and yes I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. How arrogant of you to say that the Church got it wrong and you got it right.
Eric, 1Timothy 3:15 ...you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth. Not the Bible, which we believe all of it as the inspired word of God, but the Church.
Right Eric. In John 6 Jesus says that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood 5 times. Verse 51: if anyone eats of this bread he will liver forever, and the bread that I give is my flesh. Verse 53 unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you Verse 54: he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life…Verse 55: My flesh is food indeed, my blood is drink indeed…Verse 56: He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. And, even after John 6:63, many of His disciples leave.
So we have 5 verses where Jesus clearly speaks of eating His flesh and drinking His blood, the bread He will give is His flesh, etc. And you take one verse that appears to contradict all that-which it doesn’t-and <i>that<i> is what you use to uphold your erroneous belief?
To Claire S…. your reference to church teaching is where we differ, the bible clearly confirms in the words of Jesus at the last supper to do this in remembrance of me something William Tyndale refused to remove from his translation and why he was burnt at the stake in no way does it say the bread and wine became flesh and blood John 6:63 explains what it means. The ‘church’ got it wrong. I accept Mary is not held as a goddess and yet we are told she is to be co-redemptrix alongside Jesus?? In church history due to the pagan culture of worship there was always a goddess and in the O.T. we know Astoreth (the Queen of Heaven) was worshipped so Mary became a substitute as well as other pagan practices. We are not to trust man but G-d and following the teachings of men in the RC church will always keep the veil over the eyes of the laity. I know it hurt me to discover these truths it was like losing family and yet the Spirit does reveal the truth and you truly come into the family of G-d. If you read the bible do you read it believing some of it is not true or do you accept it as G-d breathed and inerrant. I know the RC church does not encourage the reading of it and say it is the ‘church’ that interprets it for you. I encourage you and any others to free yourself from the traditions of men and read the bible allowing His word to teach and like Peter revelation comes.
The Holy Spirit would never speak to someone by leading them to believe that Communion is merely a remembrance. (I do read the Bible, by the way.) And Mary is not revered as a goddess. If you believe that, you are sorely mistaken about Church teaching.
I left the Roman Catholic church once I began to read my bible and found the truth which set me free. The sacraments are not required for salvation only faith. We are all priests. The communion is done in remembrance it is His spoken word that gives life in us. There is only one mediator between G-d and man - Jesus. Mary is elevated as a replacement for the pagan worship of a goddess. Jesus is the rock not Peter, it is the revelation Peter received on which the church is built and the pope therefore is a man made leader of a man made institution. Jesus is the head and leader of His church. It is not a building. I urge all RC’s to read the bible and let the Holy Spirit speak to you. ’ Come out from amongst them. ‘
John Thomas
Its almost amusing to read some of the posts from those that have left the church. They seem to be patting themselves on the back, and kicking up their heels—gleeful about their grand decision. Now they feel so relieved, and superior to those who remain. They are a lot to be pitied—although they don’t see it that way.
Remember the Church never leaves you. You leave the church.
Who may suffer for it? Certainly not the Church. Eternity is coming.
“1. Are you sure members of the Church hierarchy are worse than anyone else?”
Doesn’t this first question encourage mediocrity? “The Catholic church is just another institution with this problem, all religious institutions have this problem…”, so the answer is just to live with it? As Catholics it’s better to ask hard questions of our Church and try to change things.
The Catholic Church made me an atheist. As a young boy it was easy to believe the doctrine, just like Santa. As an educated, intelligent adult, a more scientific look at the world turns the so called truth into work of fiction..They call it faith but its a form of mind control. I have read the Bible multiple times and I will agree that lessons on life, taught by Jesus, will make your life here better. That makes him a great teacher not the sonof god. Read your history, Constatine used the Catholic Church to control the masses. They were giving tax money to the church so he made the Church a branch of his government, put the pope in his pocket and reformed his empire. The books put together by the Council of Nicea were carefully picked out of a much more complex collection of writings, picking out only the books that suited there needs.
I suppose people have different reasons for leaving the church. I can suggest a common pattern - young Catholics tend to date or marry outside of the Catholic community extremely frequently. Catholic weddings are on the decline.
When I was younger I used to want a Catholic wife and marriage. I remember going to Mass weekly as a child and would read the paper booklets about the mass sermon for that date, the prayer, sequence, etc. - a weekly liturgy. I noticed that towards the end of those prayer booklets there were Mass readings for formal events like marriage. I still remember thinking that someday when I grow up I’ll have a Catholic wife.
Years later deep into adulthood I found it unrealistic. Every Catholic dating attempt I have tried has failed. The odds are astronomical, but it’s true. So I gave up. More than the once the woman who rejected me usually went on to date or marry a Non-Catholic.
I read that less than 10% of college students date within their religion. So intra-religious dating is rare among the youth. That is the major obstacle for Catholicism. Personally, I found it too difficult.
Now my girlfriend is Protestant. I am well aware that the Catholic Church would not see my marriage as valid. But at this point I’m too burnt out from one-sided rejections by Catholic women to care - a repetition of one-dimensional routs. I read in psychology that the human brain adapts neurophysiologically to repeated rejection in the caudate nucleus. The source of pain becomes a danger signal. I think that article is correct. I can’t coceptualize trying to date Catholic women anymore because the pain has numbed me to the point where I don’t care.
But my Protestant girlfriend is very beautiful. I think God chose me for an example of ecumenism. That’s the best religious reason I can think of. I still consider myself Catholic but don’t go to Mass anymore. Even if I have a Protestant wife I would still want my children to go to one of the elite Catholic schools in my state like St. Thomas Aquinas HS. At least I can still be a Catholic parent to a Catholic child despite not having a Catholic wife.
I know many Catholics will not like this post, but they really need to examine the other side - Catholic women rejecting Catholic men at the exclusion of dating Non-Catholics. A good example is Katie Holmes who married a Scientologists.
Kathryn, please read in Scripture John Chapter 6:35-71, and Matt 25: 31-46.
Jesus gave us the Catholic Church for a reason. The Eucharist is extremely important. The Sacraments given to us by Our Lord are very important. God gave us this Church for all people. He also tells us how He wants to be worshiped- we do not get to decide for ourselves how we want to worship Him.
You are correct- Jesus is and should be our Greatest Love- one of those ways to show Him is to remain in Him by staying in His Church.
These Are 5 very good examples of considering to leAve the Catholic Church examples. Although I can relate with them, they were not the reason/s I left the Catholic Church. I have to resort back to my childhood first of all. I’‘ve been blessed to have a unique inspiration for His Story, God’s word. I found myself longing to be with a Savior that could truly fill these needs. I searched high and low at church, in the missalette, the hymnals(song), the stories of Lordes and Fatima, CCD, the sAints, Mary the blessed virgin, confirmation, confessions, talking with clergy, teaching CCD, blood drives, driving the elderly, visiting the elderly, retreats yearly especially with ny loving grandma EleAnor, youth groups, young adult groups…searching and longing for JESUS. None of these works could love me back. I wanted and craved for Love. The ritual of the Mass was difficult for me to grasp, I didn’t know why we would need to do this every week, when I found out Jesus was truly In my heart already. I didn’t have to eat him weekly, but already in my heart. I read God’s word to find out a out Romans 10:9. One day, all by myself, I started to put everything together. All the values I learned from Catholocism was leading me to find the “Greatest Love Of All.” This was a Love that was so much deeper than I ever felt. He loves me! Me! Of all people, Jesus loved me! All the endless works and searches, and He was right here all along! I get goosies just thinking about it! I love you Catholic Church, always have.. I always will. Thank you for everything you have done for me to find my true Husband for eternity, JESUS!
Isabella
In the Bible you will find that these things you disagree with are forbidden
by God’s word. So where the church agrees with God’s word you would have to accept the church teachings which is against abortion and contraception
Isabella, thank you for your honesty. I will pray for you.
I stumbled upon this contemplating leaving the church. I’m pro-choice, I use contraception within my marriage and have no regrets or remorse, I don’t have a problem with same-sex marriage or IVF, and have many other disagreements with church doctrines. Any of these disagreements or doubts I have researched countless of times to make myself understand why the church teaches what it teaches. I’ve listened to priests, and speeches, read books and church documents, read blogs to hear conversion stories so I have honestly made an effort to understand and accept. I now understand why, but I still do not agree. I pray my rosary daily for a softening or change of heart but right now my prayers have still gone unanswered because in order to recognize that the church is right, I must give over complete trust and acknowledged that I am wrong. Hopefully this is something I will be able to do in the future, but for now, I pretty much have answered all five questions with certainty.
Clarification: By Church/God I mean Church and God not that the Church is God, although it is His Church. (Gee I wish there was an edit button)
Moneybags, ultimately it’s a matter of whether or not you believe what the Church claims about herself: that she is the Church founded by Our Lord, that she has the fullness of Truth, and that the Holy Spirit guides the Teaching Authority-Magesterium-when teaching on matters of faith and morals, so that it is God’s teaching, NOT the teaching of fallible human beings.
Once you accept that, then you see that the Church’s teaching is true and you will look into that particular teaching that you find hard to accept and learn the reasoning behind it. Then even if it still doesn’t make sense to you, then you realize that it is yourself, not the Church/God who has a problem. But if you really accept that this is God’s Church and that He teaches us through His Church, then you will accept the wisdom of the Church’s teachings.
So we have to go back to the Word of God to decide on the moral issue then study the way your church interprets these passages. If you are out of line with clear teaching in the bible or in the church you need the fear of God to get your fallen nature back in line - since God can put us in an eternal place of fire - the fear of this will make us repent. The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom - proverbs.
I think these questions are trying to predict the reasons why people leave the Church. Unfortunately, most Catholics leave the Church for serious reasons and while such questions may be interesting, I suspect they don’t really get at the heart of what may be bothering most people.
I think generally speaking this has to do with how the Church structures the way you act out your faith. If you are in any way dissenting (even if honestly seeking) it is very difficult for you to respect and follow the Church’s procedures.
Simple example: you honestly have a moral disagreement with Church teaching in an area that would normally require you to go to confession. You cannot truly be sorry about something you don’t believe is wrong. Therefore, you cannot make a good confession. Therefore you cannot fully participate in mass. Therefore you become a non-practicing Catholic.
Looks like another sock puppet. How coincidental that two people with different names are posting 20 minutes apart on an article that was written 10+ months ago! The attitude toward the “cheerful little housewife” and “screaming, pooping, crying drooling bundle of joy” says it all.
To Ann- Sexual selfishness? Just because we don’t want a screaming, pooping, crying, drooling bundle of joy every other year? Please, I think my husband and I know we accept and love every part of each other when we took our vows, we don’t need to risk a pregnancy to prove that. And if NFP is just as good as other types of contraceptives (a vasectomy is less than 0%) then why not just use the pill or an iud? Oh that’s right, you need to be “open to life”, you have to be thrilled and open to the failure of NFP. Contradictory much? Not to mention when we had our marriage classes a cheerful little housewife came in to say “NFP works! And by the way, I have 11 kids!” We’re told it’s a sin and to pray and go to confession about it. But you can only be forgiven IF you feel sorry and remorseful which we do not. We have 4 beautiful kids and my husbands vasectomy has been one of the greatest things since sliced bread!
The church isn’t my gynecologist and I wish to keep that separate, thank you very much. Most “good” Catholics say that if you disagree with and don’t fallow x,y,and z of the Catholic church but you do like a,b, and c, then guess what? You’re Protestant!
You don’t need forgiveness for praying to Mary. If you worshipped Mary, that would be another story. But praying to Mary and asking for her intersession is no different than asking a family member here on earth to pray for you.
In leaving the Catholic Religion, my relationship with Jesus grew, whereas it was stagnate in the Catholic Religion. I never knew what the Holy Spirit actually felt like until I found a church outside of the Catholic Religion that was Baptist. I sincerely feel down to my soul, God knows our hearts, and it is up to US to have a relationship with him. I feel this can happen in any religion, but beware, when you read the bible and it’s warnings and rules, I feel there are many religions that are doing the wrong thing… Please pray to discern if what your religion is teaching is true.
It concerns me for example that in the bible where are babies baptised like the Catholics do? where is the notion of original sin?
I have learned to Love all walks of “religions” but also right now pray that all of us are being lead in the right direction and that is to Jesus, and I am sorry, I have to ask for forgiveness God, for praying to your mother Mary, for I did not know anybetter till now!
I will do better to follow the bible.
Cook, your situation can be rectified, I’m sure. Please don’t give up. But be prepared-you may have to be willing to make some sacrifices if necessary, but it is important that you come back to full participation in the sacraments and if your wife were to convert I bet you would both be very happy.
I’m no expert but I can’t understand why an annulment would be needed since your wife was not a Christian for her first marriage, but if it is required, that would be a sacrifice that both of you would need to be willing to make. The Church should work with you, as long as you are willing to work with the Church.
Although Augustine was brought up a Christian by his mother he did not really give himself to Jesus until much later. He did these things below before taking the plunge :-
St Augustine lived with a woman for 15 years then decided to leave her to get married on his mothers advice to a noble woman. “In Milan Augustine met the bishop Ambrose, and was startled to find in him a reasonableness of mind and belief, a keenness of thought, and an integrity of character far in excess of what he had found elsewhere. For the first time, Augustine saw Christianity as a religion fit for a philosopher.”
I wonder if his mother had baptised him in the catholic faith as a child.
“Soon after his arrival in Milan, Augustine was plunged into two crises.”
“First, his mother arrived from Africa, and persuaded him that he ought to give up his mistress and get married. He agreed to a betrothal to a suitable young lady; but his betrothed was too young for immediate marriage, and so the actual wedding was postponed for two years. Meanwhile the mistress had been sent back to Africa. Augustine, not ready for two years of sexual abstinence, lapsed back into promiscuity.”
Your wife was not a Christian before you married her so she would not know the marriage laws of Jesus and it looks like you had drifted from the faith a bit (but not as much as the prodigal). Have you spoken to Bishop
about your unique circumstances
If you believe that there is no salvation outside of the catholic church then we have about maybe 800 million worried Christians including the Eastern Orthodox. Since I am a proto Catholic I would have the same problems.
Although Augustine was brought up a Christian by his mother he did not really give himself to Jesus until much later. He did these things below before taking the plunge :-
St Augustine lived with a woman for 15 years then decided to leave her to get married on his mothers advice to a noble woman. “In Milan Augustine met the bishop Ambrose, and was startled to find in him a reasonableness of mind and belief, a keenness of thought, and an integrity of character far in excess of what he had found elsewhere. For the first time, Augustine saw Christianity as a religion fit for a philosopher.”
I wonder if his mother had baptised him in the catholic faith as a child.
“Soon after his arrival in Milan, Augustine was plunged into two crises.”
“First, his mother arrived from Africa, and persuaded him that he ought to give up his mistress and get married. He agreed to a betrothal to a suitable young lady; but his betrothed was too young for immediate marriage, and so the actual wedding was postponed for two years. Meanwhile the mistress had been sent back to Africa. Augustine, not ready for two years of sexual abstinence, lapsed back into promiscuity.”
Your wife was not a Christian before you married her so she would not know the marriage laws of Jesus and it looks like you had drifted from the faith a bit (but not as much as the prodigal). Have you spoken to Bishop
about your unique circumstances
If you believe that there is no salvation outside of the catholic church then we have about maybe 800 million worried Christians including the Eastern Orthodox. Since I am a proto Catholic I would have the same problems.
St. Paul’s School only went to the 8th grade. Graduates then had to move or attend public high school. At this time the priesthood or monestary was considered but the calling was no there. The result was an introduction to sin on a level never seen before. After a couple of years the Catholic classmates seem to assimilate into other peer groups and the evil one took controll. When I met my wife she was Jewish. Over a period of two years we dated and found love. I believe our love is blessed because through our relationship we both found our sinfulness waning. I introduced my wife to Christ first through example. She would ask about my philosophy and I would credit the values I learned as a Catholic. We graduated to attending a Baptist church where she became committed to a Christian way of life. We still have a problem. I cannot find peace in my spiritual life. I’ll be turning 50 this year and have been told I cannot return to The Catheolic Church. I led my Jewish wife to Christ but non of that matters if I am Hell bound. My lifetime of experience has led me to long for the relationship with Christ that can only be achieved through the Catholic Church. Two different Parrish priests have told me I am disqualified to receive the sacraments because I married a devorced women. My argument is that because she was a non-Catholic and never married under the doctrine of the Church, any marriage she was involved in, including our own should not be recognized by the Church. The churches recognition of secular marriage conflicts with signicants of the Priesthood. I know I can’t change the rules but perhaps I’m confused on this issue. I long to return to the life that I loved as a child, a life devoted to Christ. I once attended Mass on a daily basis served as an alter boy and kept close to The Church. I strayed as many people do, but I have no right to confess my sins and receive absolution and penance.
I suppose it depends on the detail - remember the prodigal son who had prostitutes and wild living but the Father accepted him back. And the woman at the well who had five husbands - Jesus was strict on divorce and there was no remarriage until one partner had died but it seems to depend on the persons knowledge at the time of coming face to face with Jesus. The woman at the well accepted Jesus but I am sure she did not go back to her old way of life - and she evangelised her community. Also the woman caught in adultery was told not to sin again. I would not like to try the prodigal son approach twice but this may be your first time - since you desire to return.
I left as a rebellious teen. I had a desire to return after discovery of many of the points stated above, only to find that I was no longer welcome because I married a devorced woman. I was told by the Parrish Priest that I could come but receive sacraments. I was heartbroken. As a confirmed Catholic I guess this means I’m Hell bound.
csi effect ebook http://audiobookscollection.co.uk/Editing-with-Avid-Media-Composer-5-Avid-Official-Curriculum/p210580/ proactive risk management ebook magic bleeds ebook palm ebook download
Of course the correct answer is that you need to get a life. Because if you really had all the answers, you would be able to find something constructive to do with your time.
Both Feet Out—wow, we are insulting? You aren’t though—- yeah right.
So Our Lord would not vote for Romney?—-well he certainly would not vote for Obama, who has promoted abortion and Planned Parenthood in every possible way. Like many Catholics he would be voting to oppose Obama—choosing (hopefully) the lesser of evils.
Now go have a happy day patting yourself on the back for your rash judgments.
Both Feet Out - Thanks for the dose of ‘insulting and self-congratulatory’ sermonizing! Have a great day yourself!
Like Kathleen, I have left the Catholic church over these issues. I do not feel that the Catholic church, or any church for that matter, should be getting involved in politics. The rude, judgmental responses to Kathleen, which are both insulting and self-congratulatory, only confirm to me that the members of the Catholic church are cold and unwelcoming. Unless you can sign up for group-think, you’re not welcome in the church anymore. Do I think that Jesus will tell all of you that you’re exactly right, and that He would praise you for shoving away other Catholics just so you could be “boldly defending the faith?” Do you really think that Jesus Himself would vote for Romney? Give me a break. You are exhibiting an extremely poor witness for Christ and really it looks more like you are witnessing for yourself because the ideal Catholic is conveniently just like you. How arrogant. The Church is not declining in membership because people can’t handle the orthodox truth, they are leaving because of Catholics like you who make Catholicism look hateful, pompous and unChristian. Good job!
Kathleen—bye-bye. Too bad you have confused the church with Social Services. That was never its purpose. I can’t totally blame your ignorance—the bishops have mislead people and failed to instruct in the Faith after Vatican II. Sorry you have not educated yourself.
Kathleen - I’m sure your local Episcopal Church would love to have you. They have caved to every emotional cultural whim since the 1930’s, from contraception, (for marrieds only - wink, wink) to all sorts of sexual perversions, (as long as ‘consensual’ and rooted in ‘love’, meaning a sappy form of self-serving sexual license). Since people are leaving the liberal Protestant congregations in droves, I’m sure they will love to have you.
.
It is a shame that you have given up on Catholicism, two days before the most important presidential election of our times. Will it be the (totalitarian and faith-less) philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, or the rich and multi-layered faith-infused worldview of Edmund Burke which will prevail? George Weigel wrote a wonderful essay on the difference recently, and in case you didn’t guess, Obama and the liberals are Hobbesian, Romney and the conservatives Burkean.
.
We are all sick of the campaigns, but very important issues are at hand. Hopefully you will re-evaluate your stance later. I am proud of our Catholic leaders at this time and place. I wish more of them would stand up boldly for the life and marriage issues. Here in Massachusetts, it is a cold and dark and threatening place to try to be a joyful, prolife Christian, but some of us will endure the hate and insults and carry on anyway.
I’ve made my choice. I am leaving the Catholic church. After serving as President of the school board for my local Catholic k -12 it pains me to make this decision, but I simply can no longer worship or contribute my time and financial resources to the church. We need compassion and social justice over politics. The St. Paul and Minneapolis Archdiocesan have made the decision to bring politics and prejudice into church services and I have had enough. Time for a change, or time to leave - Since I see no change; time for me to join another church that has their priorities straight.
Michael—thumbs up. Good post!!!
Michael, your comment is well appreciated. Thanks, and God Bless you.
Several points: as to the pedophile scandal, I wouldn’t be so quick to conclude that there is a continuing cover up or that the church denies claims it knows are true. Moreover, I’m sure that not all claims are true and not all motives are pure which hurts legitimate victims and legitimate attempts to protect the faithful and betrayed children. Similarly, the victims lawyers and the media seem far more interested is cash and/or destroying the church than they are in protecting, healing and comforting the faithful and betrayed children. But apply the five point test set forth in this article. How does the pedophile scandal lead one to leave the church to go elseware when these scandals and cover ups exist throughout society. Almost no one pleads guilty but holds out for a more favorable plea bargain. Virtually no defendant gives a plaintiff a blank check but requires proof and seeks to mitigate damages. Few if any parents want their child to be punished to the full extent of the law but seek to minimize punishment and hope that the child repents. This is not to minimize the church’s culpability but to have you reconsider a move to a more welcoming church that does not have the fullness of the body of Christ.
As to the cruel and vindictive tone of some commentators, I ask for forgiveness. You are right of course that at our best no one would wish another to burn in hell or suffer punishment for their opinions. But again, I’m sure you and your non-judgmental, non-name calling, welcoming fellow church members understand fallen human nature and the frustration of many flawed but faithful Catholics who are frankly sick and tired of having their beloved church attacked so viciously and often insincerely by a secular society that either seeks its destruction or treats it with self-righteous contempt, arrogantly refusing to suffer such fools gladly. I reference the comments in the New York Times to any Maureen Dowd article about the faith. I reference many of the comments in this thread. If Christ himself got frustrated and wished that the fire would soon be ignited, and Peter cut off the ear of one who attacked Christ, we can understand, but still condemn, such intemperate and nasty comments.
Finally, never forget that the work is only hard because of sin. Jesus says His burden is light but yet He is sad that so many reject Him because of their ties to this world and all its false charms and attachments. I gently urge you and all reading this thread to pray for each other and the Holy Catholic Church. May the Holy Spirit watch over it and guide it and all Christians, now and forever. Amen.
Just to clarity a few points that many of the furious commenters above missed:
The revulsion at the Catholic church over the pedophile scandal isn’t based on the fact that there were criminal child rapists in their midst. We all know that the church is constituted of flawed human beings. No human institution will be immune.
The true scandal is how the church covered up for every one of these molesters and rapists. That is where the great moral leaders failed. To this day the church frantically covers up and denies claims that they know are true. They continue to accuse victims and turn away from the truth.. The institutional instinct to protect one’s own does not extend to the faithful and betrayed children; it only covers the abusive priests. Many of us are revolted by these continuing actions.
Anna Quindlen’s husband didn’t leave her, as so many commenters assume, causing her to be bitter and turning her against the church. She is still happily married.
I am surprised at the cruel and vindictive tone of so many comments. These are devout Catholics, the spiteful, nasty, judgemental, Name calling commenters? No wonder so many of us flee to more welcoming churches—not because it’s easier but because they call on us to do the hard work of a Life following Christ.
Sleeper—your name tells a lot. For countless centuries civilizations have believed in God or gods. You say there is none. I think you are outnumbered and in for a great surprise on your death bed. Try to WAKE up before then—sleeper.
what a laughable list, clearly gear toward ingorant fools.
You only need one reason; there is no god.
Try looking at you videos of people who say they have been to hell and back.
Dr Rawlings the heart surgeon who brings people back from the dead has a good website. He was an athiest who became a Christian after hearing the terrifying testimonies of some of his patients. “23 minutes in hell by Bill
Weise” is another website.
Anna Quindlen is right in doing this. I can’t believe what these comments say. It is amazing how so many people can be brainwashed into believing in God, much less the Catholic Church. I have grown up in the church because my parents imposed it on me. Luckily, I was able to resist the brainwashing attempts. Now, I realize that you will say I’m influenced by the devil. Well, when I come back to this website I will laugh so hard because I do not believe in the devil or god. Show me PROOF, not some lines in the Bible. For now, nothing has materialized so scientifically, there is no choice but to not believe. You may be praying for me, but I’m hoping (yes only hoping because realistically wishing something to a sky buddy won’t change your opinion) that at least one of you will break from this trance the cult of Catholicism has you in.
Is there an email address where I can ask questions about the Bible?
Dominick your wrote: “When we fail to change….we fail. When we fail to evolve…we become extinct.” True, WE are supposed to change. The Church will not succeed if it ‘changes’ with the times and goes along with the ways of the world. It is US who need to change, the Church is trying to bring us up while we are trying to bring the Church down.
Pope Benedict, many years ago when he was still a Cardinal, stated that the Church would be severely reduced, would lose not only members but also much of what she owns. She will go thru a serious trial and will not be the Great Church that she once was, however, that will only be temporary. We need people in the Church who want to BE holy and are willing to let God work in their lives to make that often painful transformation. It is better to have fewer truly faithful Catholics, than a multitude of Catholics in name only who are trying to destroy the Church from within. In a short time it will appear as though they have succeeded, but it will be short lived. The Church will not collapse due to it’s teachings which are True and cannot change, but will almost collapse due to human beings, both within and outside the Church.
You wrote: A priest is no more likely to abuse a child than a male schoolteacher, and a bishop is no more likely to cover it up than a school administrator….
I hope you are not implying that in any way this excuses the behavior? Also much more is expected from a priest and the leadership of our church. They continue to fail us to this day.
I am absolutely sure that if the church does not change…does not understand the church in the USA…does not allow women to be priests…we are in big trouble. Catholics in Europe are almost non-existent….as is going to church. Do you want this to happen in the US as well?
When we fail to change….we fail. When we fail to evolve…we become extinct. We should not allow this to happen to the Catholic Church for many reasons. Not only spiritual, but also fiscal. I do not know the numbers but I assume that the majority of fiscal support comes from the USA. That is probably decreasing….and will do so in the future if the
Church does not understand her people….their needs….
cermak - I pity the liberal Reform Judaism congregation that has inherited your angst and discomfiture about being engendered as a woman. My Jewish friends would agree. Luckily, when I consider the wonderful and thoughtful converts from Judaism that we have welcomed to the Roman Catholic Church, such as Dr. Bernard Levinson, Prof. Hadley Arkes, Larry Kudlow and others, I’d say the RC Church has gotten the best of the deal.
The Catholic Church was founded by Christ, the Son of God and the gates of Hell will not prevail against. So rant and rage against it all you like. Nothing will make a dent in it. Embrace your pettiness and move on.
Sure my spelling is not good in that post. Blame it on haste. By perfect knowledge I meant the knowledge of hindsight. That is, I could answer the question of how I would fare spiritually because I had the benefit of hind sight because it has been years.
Biologically, yes, women and men are different. But I refuse any distinctions based on gender which is a construct, so I still reject the equal but different (separate but equal) treatment that the CC gives to gender.
Yes I do reject Jesus as Messiah. Nope, the comments had not yet died. The last one before mine was only from Aug 8. I would expect that you would continue to get responses what with leaving the church so much in the conversation these days.
Well, Cermak- yours is a strange post- you were a city council member and you can’t spell? Wonderful. You also claim that you have “perfect knowledge”, strangely compare the Catholic Church with the Board of Nabisco(!?), and are “sure that the Church’s teachings are wrong”. You can’t understand how men and women are separate (different) but equal? Not very difficult, women have different bodies than men, less muscle mass, carry and bear children. Men and women tend to excel in different areas. Of course we are equal but different unless you are blind to reality and biology. Obviously you do not believe that the Church was founded by Jesus, that He is the Messiah,and that the Church is not a man-made institution, but is both Divine and human. Have a good life. BTW, this article was written back in May. I thought the comments had died out already.
Well, with an entry titled as this one is, what did you expect?
I actually will agree that Christianity did treat women better back in the day. The issue is, today, there are plenty of different religions that do better than the Catholic Church.
Another genius adds their two cents, or salvos—Somebody with all the ANSWERS from the comments.
You left the church, so who cares? This “religion” was founded by Christ—so answer to Him. In the meanwhile continue to feel really good and happy about your decision—- while on this earth. But I wouldn’t trade places with you for anything. You don’t want God’s blessing so best of luck. (If you knew your history, it was the Catholic Church that was first (not Jewish, nor pagans, nor Islam) to treat women with respect and dignity. The Blessed Mother is about as close to being on the threshold of Divinity as any human can get.)
I left the Church back in the lead up to the whole you can’t vote for Kerry dustup in 2004.You see I was a mscaping catholicismember of a city council and did not like the idea of a religious institution being able to make my service to my constituents harder than it already was. What if I voted to permit the enlargement of the Planned Parenthood facility? Would I be denied Communion? How about if I denied a permit to expand the Church parking lot?
I believe in Enlightenment values dearly and would cut my hand off before I allowed any church to directly impact (indirect impact via sermons etc. are OK) my service to my constituents or my own vote in an election.
So I left, and am happier now than I was then, too boot! One of the most obvious gains I have is that poof! I immediately got promoted to being the equal of any XY person around (I am XX). The Church can take its equal but different (separate but equal) rhetoric and keep it as far as I’m concerned.
SO the answers to your questions?
1. No, I don’t expect they are much worse than other people. The difference is, the Board of Nabisco (just an example) hasn’t gone forth and proclaimed that they are the inheritors of the Apostles and that they have the Truth and that folks ought to obey what they say. The hypocrisy does make a difference, here. Also, seeing the examples of spiritual blackmail that went on to keep the coverup going (one guy in the Diocese of Davenport was refused Communion because he “failed to forgive” the transgressor against his son.
2. Yes, and I have the advantage of “perfect knowledge” here since some time has passed. The fact is, living a religion when you don’t agree with its tenets causes a kind of cognitive dissidence that results in stress. Walk away and hey! Presto! No more stress. In my case, I sought a historical faith that did not conflict with the Enlightenment values I hold dear. This faith (Reform Judaism) does require that I lead an ethical life and strive to improve the world with my life.
3. Yes I am sure that the Church’s teachings are wrong. Obviously, I disagree now with more than I disagreed when I first left. Women are equal to men. Full stop, no qualifiers needed. Institutions run by a group of people, say XY folk, inevitably come to be ruled FOR that same group.
4. Well, since I no longer believe in your Christ, it is clear that I don’t believe the Church is inspired. And if it were, it would not teach the subjugation of women either in the home, in society or in the church.
5. Yes I am sure I don’t need the church. I am sure that very few people actually need the church.
It is indeed a red-letter day when Anna Quindlen leaves the Catholic Church, or at least stops posing as a Catholic (which is nearer the mark; it was half the point of her employment by the NYT in the 1980s).
If she is so impressionable that she believes the contrived palaver about pervert priests (not that there’s anything wrong with perversion, of course!); or that grace is unnecessary, because one can pretend there is a “goodness” based on social faddery—well, she’s welcome to this nonsense. And she needn’t ever fear being burned at the stake or thrown to the lions. She’ll be up in the stands, complimenting Caligula on his clever anti-god essay in Vanity Fair!
A Joseph Smith founded the Mormon Church. You related? His polygamy ideas brought about his ending. How people twist religion into what they want it to be.
Joseph Smith - Good luck with your liberal Protestant churches. Take the Episcopal Church - please!!!! The lesbian head of the Episcopal divinity school in Cambridge, MA (where else?) wrote an essay about the ‘blessings of an abortion’, a strange apologetics, but as our friends at Planned UnParenthood say, ‘all abortion, all the time - no excuses, no apologies!’
.
Perhaps because the new Episcopals love all those blessed abortions, they have very few children/new members… but, don’t despair! At the recent triennial Episopal meeting in Indianapolis, a newrite was approved, for the burial of cats and dogs! Oh, those intolerant Catholics - they only have funerals for human beings - how species-ist!
I am a graduate of a Catholic grade school, Catholic high school and Catholic college. I left the church because it is every bit as corrupt now as in Martin Luther’s time. The pedophilia, the coverups by the hierarchy, the elevation of Mary to “co-redemptrix,” etc. etc.
The author is incorrect in stating that by leaving the church, one leaves the sacraments behind. Episcopal priests, orthodox priests and Lutheran pastors all still have the power of the priesthood. When their demoninations left the Roman church, they took with them bishops who had the power to ordain. That power continues to be passed down. So, if you receive communion in a Lutheran or orthodox or Episcopal church, you are very definitely receiving the body and blood of Christ. The clergy of these demoninations also have the power to forgive sins and still offer private confession to those who request it. Otherwise, they issue a blanket statement of forgiveness at Sunday services.
The Catholic Church reached its zenith in the late 1940s in the United States, appealing as always to the poor and superstitious immigrant groups. The church has been on a downward spriral since then because people no longer buy into the threat of eretnal damnation if one questions or challenges church doctrine and customs.
Rome is currently working hard to reunite with the Church of England and several Lutheran synods. I used to favor this but I have come to the conclusion that the Protestant churches would be foolish to reconnect with a church that is totally out of touch with its current and former members as well as the modern world. Hell, Rome was still burning people at the stake until the early 1800s!
Protestantism is a heresy. But those Christian Protestants are sincere in their belief, they do not know or believe they are heretics. If they live their lives according to the Gospel to the best of their ability and seek to do God’s Will, it is not our place to say that they are not saved. That is God’s business. I do believe that most would be saved, they just do not have the fullness of the Truth. The Catholic Church does NOT say Protestants are not saved. However, it is interesting to note that there are many, not all, but many Protestants who believe Catholics are going to hell.
Surely a heretic cannot get to heaven. Which would mean about 500 million
who profess Jesus as their saviour are deluded ?
Charles, No. But they are in heresy. Protestantism is a heresy.
Are you really saying that say a baptist christian or methodist such as
say john wesley or billy sunday or billy graham are not really christian and are therefore not saved.
Charles- “Jesus does not seem to talk about denominations but talks to them as Christian churches commending their good points and showing them their bad points.” No, but you did. Jesus was clearly speaking of the various locations of the One, True Church, and the problems with some of her members. He only founded One church, only intended for there to be One church. Read the Gospel of John for starters. I don’t know what parish you belong(ed) to, but the faults of her individual members do not negate the Truths of the teachings of Christ’s Church. I suggest you look into the history of Christianity, and look at sources that are not biased against the Catholic Church. Read the Didache, and Early Church Fathers.
Yes I was baptised a catholic in the year 2000. Jesus does not seem to talk about denominations but talks to them as Christian churches commending their good points and showing them their bad points.
If someone wanted to condemn the catholic church then they would not identify thyatira as the catholic church which is the 2nd most commended church.
The evidence of these churches being a timeline as well is considerable if you care to look at a commentary or two. Jesus is prophecying what will happen in the future such as diocletian’s persecution and also to avoid the lukewarmness in the last church before Jesus returns to the mount of olives. This being the Laodecian church.
Hi Patt, but he claimed to receive Holy Communion- don’t know if that was in a Catholic Church, I just figured it was. Obviously Protestants have to come up with explanations for why they only go back 500 years, so they try to explain it away by claiming the Churches spoken of in Revelation are various Christian “denominations”.
Joan62
Obviously Charles is not a Catholic and his information must have come from Protestant sources.
If he is anything like some of the Protestants I have spoken to—he will ignore and avoid Catholic publications and the undisputed true history of the Church and substitute what he prefers to believe. I refuse to waste more time on this site.
They were not all the same if you read the commentaries and what
Jesus said about them. The last church age is the Laodecian (lukewarm)
church - which is rich (in money) ....etc.
It proves that the Roman church was not the only church and that the Roman church did not have authority over all churches for about 400 to 500 years.
The types refer to time periods but also individuals and churches.
Eg You could have a philadelphian church in Catholicism.
Charles, like I said you sound like a Protestant. The seven churches in Revelation were all the same church,they were the first Christian churches, they were just in different locations, like we have Catholic dioceses and parishes all over the world. Most theologians would not say what you claim, except anti-Catholic protestant theologians.
Charles, you and your family need to find a good Orthodox Catholic Church and good, sound instructors. Sadly the Faith has not been taught in the last 40 years and most Catholics are ignorant of its teachings. Read as much as you can by Fulton Sheen, New Advent, Catholic Answers, (both on the internet), read copies of New Oxford Review, Crisis Magazine— or anything published before Vatican !!. At present you seem confused about what you believe. Some suggestions and above I have provided a good book list.
It cant be denied that Jesus destroyed the temptations that the devil put forward by quoting scripture. My own thoughts is that Jesus would have studied scripture in the flesh to demonstrate that we who are in the flesh can do the same - rather than use his divine nature - but this is only my interpretation.
The early Christians would have known that the canon was the old testament plus the gospels and the letters of the apostles which would have been easy to determine.
I don’t see any gaps of hundreds of years. These letters would have been passed round the churches such as the seven churches in Asia which were autonomous churches. So the canon would have been well known prior to the
council which put in down in writing.
The seven churches give me problems believing that the catholic church is the only christian church. Most theologians believe that the church of Thyatira (continual sacrifice)represents the catholic church. The Philadelphian (brotherly love) church is the later protestant church of the wesley spurgeon whitefield edwards era. The seven churches were not under the control of Rome. They are worth a study especially since the spirit of Jezebel was influencing many in the church of thyatira.
Charles, I don’t disagree with much of you wrote above. But if you are still receiving Holy Communion, that means that you are in total Communion with the Church, and your previous comment does not reflect that. The Church’s teaches that it is Scripture AND oral Tradition, not Scripture alone. You sound more Protestant than Catholic. Yes, the first Christians had the Hebrew Scriptures, and after a decade or two, the letters of Paul, Peter, etc. But the canon of Scripture was not determined until later. And, Jesus didn’t NEED the word to make the devil flee- Jesus IS the Word.
I still go for communion - I still see the sacraments as being scriptural.
ButI have never believed that the Bible only came around 300 years after Jesus. All the first converts were Jews who would know the Bible (OT) by heart.
The gospels would be put down in writing by many listeners who were Jews and could write. The Bereans checked what Paul was saying. People had wax writing pads so they could make notes of things. Could we say honestly that in the loaves and fishes crowd of 5000 no one would have written what they heard and saw.
Take pauls letter to the corinthians - it would have been read out at church - then copied and passed to whoever wanted a copy. Thousands of copies of the new testament letters were circulated in paul’s time - plus why would anyone wait until after the letters to write down the 4 gospels. These false beliefs of late writings were perpetrated by athiest historians.
Even the traditions were written down eg the Didache and Clements letters - they would be circulated quickly or else how could anyone pass on the faith.
Paul said do not go beyond what is WRITTEN. If Jesus needed the WORD (bible scripture) to make the devil flee then how much more do we need scripture.
Man cannot live by bread alone but by EVERY word that cometh from the mouth of GOD - ie the WHOLE bible.
So for the listeners who sought out God and believed Jesus it would not
be a problem to write down what they heard or obtain a copy of the gospels
and letters - they had scribes instead of printing presses.
Charles- your experience with the Catholic Church in Scotland may have been regrettable, but that was no reason to leave the Catholic Church altogether. And now you “go to church” via the computer? The Catholic Church is against bible study?? Sir, the Catholic Church compiled the Bible- it is responsible for there even being a bible at all. Obviously you do not see the Catholic Church as anything but a ‘man-made’ organization, instead of what she really is. The Church founded by Jesus Christ, lead by the Holy Spirit, so it cannot err in matters of Faith and Morals. The Church, inspite of some of her sinful members, is here on earth to protect and teach the Truth of Christ. The Church was here before the Bible as a matter of fact.
We as a family of catholics now watch the New York Times Square Church
live Sunday services on computer with pastor Carter Conlon. My daughters are really inspired by the scripture backed preaching - very much longer than the 2 minute homily in the CC. In fact this church
virtually changed my 5 daughters overnight and they eagerly await the services.
The NYTSC was founded by DAVID WILKERSON who had a proven record of bringing the real outcasts to Jesus - gays , drug addicts ,alcoholics.
Like Jesus he was not judgemental with those who did not know God.
It was only after belief,repentance and baptism that these people changed
their behaviour - it is all done by the power of the Holy Spirit.
We went to the CC (Scotland) every Sunday for 25 years but I never seemed to learn anything. It just became a box tick. There was no outreach to the lost or encouragement to bible study or prayer.
If anyone thinks they can be saved without scripture study then they must
think they are better than Jesus and his apostles/disciples who said extensive scripture study and meaningful prayer was not an option.
Man cannot be saved by bread alone but by EVERY word that cometh from the
mouth of GOD. Jesus used scripture to defeat the Devil - how much more do we need it.
The catholic church’s big mistake was not to repent of their undoubted
bias against bible study.
Appreciate the feedback. I choose truth. Truth in politics, truth in faith. Since when are “conservative” politics contrary to “God”?
Alecto-
As I said above you have a free will. If you want to fight the battle to save your soul you must choose to do so and not wait until things meet your standards. I like a Latin Mass, which two parishes have in my city. They are the Novus Ordo Mass and Tridentine, however I am just as happy to attend the English Mass. I make a 30 minute drive, but some people drive for an hour to one of these churches. Joan62 and Claire made good points,and now the choice is yours, either choose God—or your conservative politics.
And by the way, my politics are extremely conservative.
Alecto, I also wanted to add that while there are parishes that do not seem to uphold Church teaching very well, bad priests and bishops, etc., you need to separate what the Church really teaches from what you may be hearing and seeing in a particular parish. It is sad, I know. I had been in a parish similar to the one you mention, and many Sundays I felt frustrated and marginalized. But I knew in my heart that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Our Lord Jesus and that it has the Fullness of the Truth so, while I may have longed for a different parish, I could never leave the Church. I also reminded myself that my priest, no matter how “liberal” he was, still gave us the Eucharist and the Sacrament of Confession- and that he was still chosen by God for this and I gave him my respect due to the position he held.
Alecto, I can understand your anger toward bishops and priests who violate Church teaching. But you don’t have to be hateful about it. Outreach to gays and lesbians could be for the purpose of helping them to live chaste lives in the midst of same-sex attraction, which I’m sure is a very heavy cross to bear. It is a grave mortal sin to engage in same-sex acts; it is not a grave mortal sin to be struggling with same-sex attraction.
Good article, very thoughtful, thanks. Although my answers to 1-5 are “no” I am thinking about leaving the Church. Why? Politics, but mine are conservative. I cannot take another homily or bulletin filled with pandering to illegal aliens and extolling the praises of “social justice”, i.e. socialism. I cannot do another donation that is converted from its original purpose to some fanatical leftist socialist or communist front group or “immigrants rights” group or gay rights group. I stopped attending mass at my local church when the monseignor stated that he wanted to create a gay and lesbian outreach group. Did I forget my catechism? Those are grave mortal sins. What outreach is needed? How about a swift kick in the ass and a lecture?
I’m a Constitutional Conservative. I believe in the rule of law. I am just about ready to punch out my local Cardinal (Wuerl) who disciplined a priest for the grave crime of refusing communion to a practicing homosexual! I sincerely believe most clergy are gay, and hide it. I believe most of them loathe women either openly or secretly; suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder and need constant validation.
I am tired of writing angry letters. I am tired of being castigated, insulted, and lectured because I don’t want millions of Mexican criminals, liars, cheaters, and frauds flooding my country so they can sell drugs to kids or undercut wages for American workers. When you’re a member of the corrupt Catholic clergy it’s more important to look like you’re doing good, then to actually do good. I don’t even believe Jesus Christ himself likes Catholics. I sure don’t!
Pride was not exclusive to Satan. It continues to cause a turning away from God. Religion is not about how you “feel”. Faith and loving God is in the will. Since you have been given the gift of a free will you make your choices. Eduardo obviously has left the church since it did not meet his standards.
to the woman who was being stoned, Jesus forgave her and then told her to go and sin no more. How sad that you are dismissing the church you went to because the people are old, and that you feel you can judge them as just praying ritualistically. You are in no position to judge the state of their hearts. The Church did not leave you.
I was baptized into the Church. I went to Church every Sunday with my parents and my sister. Luckily, my sis and I were never, ever molested by our parish priest, who by all accounts was a decent person and so were the nuns who helped him run the parish. I’ll give the Church that.
I haven’t left the Church per-Se. Yet I haven’t gone to Mass in years.
When I last went into a Church a few years back to pray for better times for myself and my family, I went into a local Church nearby. I observed that a Mass was letting out. As I sat in a pew, I observed all the Parishioners and the elderly priest who could barely walk. I was 41 years old and yet I was still the youngest person there. I realized, there is no spirituality for me here. I felt nothing when I was praying in there, I didn’t feel God, his Mercy nor His Grace upon thee. All I saw were just a bunch of very old people doing what they were told to do: ritualistically praying. Maybe they found God, but I sure didn’t.
Jesus Christ (in my humble opinion) was flexible, practical and pragmatic. He didn’t bat an eyelash to save a a prostitute from being stoned or reach out to those shunned because of Leprosy (think of today’s Homosexual AIDS patients as the new modern Lepers). Why then can’t the Church Hierarchy be more like Jesus and less like Caiaphas??
The Church left me. I didn’t leave the Church :(
<I wish I could be Catholic and be a part of that two thousand year tradition. But that would mean giving up my inner self and letting my soul die by sitting in a pew week after week, having my voice not be heard, not being able to participate fully in a male-dominated organization.>
I have been Catholic all my life, am female, and have never felt marginalized by the Church as a woman. I have never thought of the Church as male-dominated or misogynist. What does “giving up my inner self” and “letting my soul die”, mean anyway?
If I sound irritated it’s because I am. What is it about humility, dying to self, carrying our cross daily that so many women seem to miss these teaching of our Lord? Do you think He was kidding? It’s about doing the Will of God and serving Him, not about having any power or privilege within the Church. Just read the lives of the female saints of the Church, they are all strong, powerful women in their own right, but were also humble and obedient. Women have beautiful roles in the Church, just different from men. So what? God puts each of us where He wants us to be for a reason, and we will find genuine peace and happiness only when we accept God’s Will for us, instead of whining that things are not as WE want them to be. If you accept that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit in matters of faith and morals, then the Church is not wrong in her teachings. Catholics who don’t agree with the Church, obviously must not believe in this divine guidance, even though it is taught by the Church.
You lost me at number 1. The point isn’t that the Catholic Church is the worst church, but that other churches don’t make the same claims as the Catholic Church does. Sure, put all the nondenominational churches together and you will see a lot of bad stuff—but you will see individual people doing bad stuff, not a hierarchy condoning it. And that makes all the difference. I understand that if you believe the Church is divinly inspired, you can’t leave. And I respect members that try to make things better from inside. But I feel it’s a bit of a cop-out to compare things in this way, as is it a cop-out to say that those that leave the Church are going to make their own religion. Many find homes in different churches.
I wish I could be Catholic and be a part of that two thousand year tradition. But that would mean giving up my inner self and letting my soul die by sitting in a pew week after week, having my voice not be heard, not being able to participate fully in a male-dominated organization. I realize this does work for many people. But please respect those for whom it doesnt, whom believe differently.
Lastly, let’s not forget that the Protestant tradition goes back a long way as well. History didn’t start over with the Reformation, you know. There’s no reset button making sure all the new Protestants un-internalized their old faith.
Just my two cents.
I agree Michele, there’s no reason to feel bad about leaving the Catholic Church for the Orthodox Church.
Very well written article. However, to use the argument that the Church isn’t any worse than what’s out there in the world falls flat. The Church should be ABOVE that.
I left…but not the sacraments. I started attending Divine Liturgy at an Orthodox Church, and it felt like coming home. No, it isn’t perfect, but a lot of what I felt upset about in Catholicism, I don’t see in the Orthodox Church. I do take the view (unlike most Orthodox) that we are Sister Churches. So, I don’t feel guilty or bad at all. Their sacraments are valid.
I just couldn’t leave to a protestant church where there are no sacraments.
Orthodoxy for me, was my faith solution.
Did Thor, Jupiter, et al. reveal themselves to us in a book/bible of sorts? Do they claim to be personal to each one of us and to love us more deeply that we can imagine? Has anyone claimed to have had any personal experience where Thor, etc. revealed themselves to them? Do any of these gods claim to have created all things? Do they claim to be the One True God? Would they die for us? I pose this question sincerely also. If anyone can give references to what these ‘gods’ taught, what their attributes are, that would be great.
To all those who are so convinced that there is a god: what are your reasons for not believing in Thor, Ganesh, Jupiter, Ceres or any other number of gods and godesses who have been or still are worshipped by mankind? I pose the question sincerely. I recently became an atheist and have found peace - I wish you all well.
No he hasn’t gone away, he is still doing nothing productive, oh Wait—he is now blasting us with more comic comments in CAPITAL LETTERS!! Too funny. Still flaunting ignorance for all the world to see, and thinking since he signs it “historian” that people will think he is educated. The great historian fails to back up his arguments with text book references—as usual. My references were provided. If he wants books on Apologetics, I can provide those too. Where is his back up—capital letters won’t suffice.
Unfortunately, the historically illiterate ARE ALIVE AND WELL.
CERTAINLY, THE HISTORICALLY ILLITERATE SUPPORTED NAZIS….. ENOUGH SAID….
Kathleen, you are so correct. Those taking issue here are either atheists or those that hate the Catholic Church. They went completely off topic as you pointed out and threw their agenda at this site (sometimes in Capital letters). Confused people that need to find something productive to do. May God direct them.
“5 Questions Before You Leave the Catholic Church”
This was the original topic. How many of those who post their anti-Catholic religious intolerance here actually have “left” the Catholic Church?
Time & time again you see intolerant folk steering the conversation off topic towards their own agendas & platforms.
Claire, happy to provide a little much needed humor!
George you are spot on.
Hey, through a very ‘enlightened’ atheist, I just discovered this site:
http://www.vaticancrimes.us/.
I can’t believe anyone would take this stuff seriously. I mean atheists are always claiming that they are so educated and intelligent. I haven’t seen evidence of it on these com boxes lately.
I do plan to go to confession this weekend after some of the exchanges I engaged in this past week.
As I said Joanp62—they prove they are brain dead and once again they never list sources. They just want us to take their ignorant remarks as fact. Again no sources listed—just name calling, which the frantic always resort to when losing an argument. Why do they bother to be on this Catholic web site? Merely to Catholic bash. Rest assured they won’t take on Islam or Jewish sites… too cowardly. Let them rave and rant, they will be gone and the Catholic Church will remain until the end of the world…
Joan, you crack me up. I think Hysterical Historian needs remedial classes in how to type in lowercase letters.
Joanp62, I am so sorry that you are so historically illiterate that YOU are UNABLE to accept HISTORICAL REALITIES.
YOU ARE THE ONE WHO NEEDS TO ENROLL IN REMEDIAL CLASSES IN HISTORY….
Historian, I do believe that you may be possessed by Satan himself. You need some serious professional help, if not an exorcist, then at least a psychiatrist. You also need to learn reading comprehension because your post on my comment is absolute nonsense. All I know is so much hatred coming from one person, yourself, it can’t be healthy for you. I really do hope you get the help you need and then turn to the Lord for his healing love. I forgive you.
Thanks George. I’m just about done with them to. But I just have to respond to one more. Hysterical Historian is at it again.
Joanp62—pay no attention to the ignorant, and brain dead jokers on this site. They can only accuse, but they never cite a reference (book, etc. ) to back them up. They ignore those references that have been offered. They simply want to attack, although they have nothing to offer for thier claims—-we should not lower ourselves to their mindless level. I am done with these petty nut cases-but watch them rant now.
Unfortunately, Joanp62 is just more of the same-old, same-old, tired theology that says the Jewish people are NOT entitled to their own theology, etc AND SHOULD/MUST endure being lectured to/FORCED TO CONVERT TO WHATEVER BRANCH OF CHRISTIANITY IS TRYING TO RAM ITS BRAND OF CHRISTIANITY DOWN THEIR THROATS…........DUH…...
PERHAPS Joanp62/In Response (etc) WOULD BENEFIT from being exposed to HISTORY CLASSES THAT ‘TELL IT LIKE IT IS’—including Rome’s LONG, LONG, LONG history of HATRED TOWARDS THE JEWISH PEOPLE.
IN Response: You said quite a lot in your lengthy post, but I will only address a couple of things.
Any Catholic who is even half-way practicing their faith should know that Jesus was a Jew and followed the Jewish laws. The Apostles were Jews, the Blessed Mother was Jewish, and in the Old Covenant the Jews were the Chosen People of God.
Remember, also, that Jesus Christ, in his own words said that He fulfilled the Old Covenant and He then established a New Covenant, not only with the Jews, but with all of humanity. As Catholics, we believe that Christ also established His visible Church here on earth, and that is the Catholic Church. If we reject His church and her teachings, we reject Christ and the One Who sent Him. “He who hears you, hears Me,” Jesus said to his Apostles. Follow the Church, follow Christ. Reject the Church, reject the One Who established it.
George,
Do you dispute the facts I presented? Are these things not true?
Alvin, name the book where you found your info. A book title please. Yes, I have studied Church History. Your info is not complete and no matter what you say about the Roman Catholic Church, it still remains the Church founded by Christ Himself with a succession of popes since St. Peter. It has never erred on Faith and moral teaching, and never will. Sure, there have been fallen members, don’t deny it.. However, it is the only religion that practices what Christ taught—forgiveness of sin, and the receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion. You have chosen to hate it, and I cannot change a poisoned mind, only defend what I know is the truth. End of subject, case closed.
To everyone on this site: The statement that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” refers to Christ’s church on earth. It belongs to Him not you or I, and arrogantly believing you are guaranteed salvation through your affiliation is not Christ’s message, and He warns us against this in the bible. His commandment was “first to love others” as reiterated in Vatican II. We are to seek The Truth. Some of you understand to some degree, but are not absolutely correct in your statements about Magesterium, the infallibilty of the Pope, the Catholic Church being the only way to get to heaven, the broad statement about Catholic nuns, nor your statement or opinions about other churches. No one even mentioned the Vatican II directive re following ones conscience, perhaps you should reread Vatican II as it has been misquoted many times on this site. It may surprise some of you, but sometimes your statements bordered on heresy. And believe me I am no expert on Vatican II but I did review it to confirm your misstatements since it has been many years since my schooling in the Catholic faith; although, it is an every evolving process. No one knows everything. One of the Pope’s purposes for Vatican II was to reunite all churches not hold the Catholic church up as the only way to salvation. To the young man regarding Catholic church offenses against Jews, some of what you said is true; it is also true that members of all churches including the Jews were subject to and also committed many violent acts against each other throughout history. For example, the Jews and Persians against the Catholics. Many sins have been committed in the name of religion, may Our Lord God forgive us all. All have been guilty, but other churches actions do not excuse the actions of the Catholic church. The Catholic church has apologized, and as a Catholic I apologize and I certainly hope we do not ever take that road again. Re the Jews: Many sins have been committed against God’s chosen people, but Our Lord made a covenant to be faithful to His chosen people, the Jews. Our Lord does not break His covenants. Don’t be to shocked Catholics, it’s true. The Lords chosen people are the Jews; not us. I listened to the Holy Father, opened the Bible and read the word; it is right there in the Bible. It has been read at mass many times when the gospel is read. I even asked my spiritual advisor to confirm this fact. The bible does not lie and it says in black and white “God’s chosen people” in reference to the Jews. Christ was Jewish, as was His whole family, and His friends the apostles were Jewish. In faith we are all God’s children, but Catholics are not God’s chosen people. Shocked? Head spinning? It is a humbling concept indeed for any Catholic that believes theirs is the only one true religion. So, I would suggest you get your head and heart right with any person of Jewish faith considering the Jews position as His chosen and their promise of faithfulness from Our Lord. My heart reaches out to all people of the Jewish faith in peace, brotherhood, and love. I know Jesus is not part of your faith, but He is for me so I mean no disrespect to Jewish people when I refer to Him. What can all this mean? Our God is an amazing God full of mystery and surprises. For the deist(s) and/or atheist(s), among us we have no quarrel, Christ loved everyone. I applaud you on your journey to find The Truth and hope it will be a short and fruitful one. Catholics back to the bible and Vatican II and church instruction on different beliefs. The Catholic church has many beautiful traditions and rituals, but we Catholics must be careful not to make traditions, ritual and/or our clergy into idols or gods. While the Pope may be infallible in certain matters of faith and doctrine he is accountable for his sins as is everyone. No one is exempt from God’s law. To Catholics on this site, practicing, seeking, leaving, or left the Catholics church Christ loves us all and no one of us is greater than the other in His eyes. Surprise Catholics on this site, even the lady who wrote this article is just as good as you are in Christ’s eyes. To the person who was called a “liar” or accused of telling “lies” I apologize. Someone assumed your purpose on this site, and only Christ knows your true intentions. Seeking The Truth is never wrong; we are all on the same journey to find it. Even the great Catholic Theologians are constantly learning. For those in spiritual pain and seeking guidance on Catholic theology you have several avenues: Jesus example, Prayer, the Bible, Vatican II regarding matters of faith and conscience, church doctrine, a spiritual advisor, and your own conscience. For those Catholics who are in a conflict of conscience over a spiritual advisor, pray and seek Christ; your answers will come. Jesus loves you and invites you in; we are all unworthy so welcome my brothers and sisters. To those concerned about “Catholic bashing” start with the Beatitude “Blessed are the persecuted” then go to the bible on persecution; it is a basic fact of your faith that it will happen and how to act when it does. To the person(s) on this site who was in body, mind, and/or spirit abused by Catholic laity or clergy, I recognize and feel your pain. How did I know you were here on this site? I too am a survivor of child sexual abuse, and truly felt your pain in your words, know that Christ loves you and I do too. I have travelled the paths that many on this site are travelling, sometimes I slipped, tripped, or got off the path; ultimately, I learned The Truth. Never stop seeking The Truth. Christ died for everyone on this site and everyone in the whole world. He and only He is pure love that exists everywhere for everyone. No exceptions, no exclusions, and no special privileges. Sorry to disappoint my fellow Catholics, we don’t have a special ticket on the express train to heaven. Read Vatican II if you don’t believe me. The Catholic church is not above Our Lord God. He is first and foremost. No religion has all the answers, but maybe together we can make it to the “pearly gates” together. How we find God is where men differ and conflicts start because of man’s sin. In the end God will reveal all, that is His promise and He is faithful.
To everyone on this site Jesus is a mystery to us all, some know His love, His sacrifice, but no one can really fully understand the mystery of the Trinity or faith. Jesus occurs in all our hearts and would never excuse evil for there is never an acceptable excuse, by excusing evil we become enablers for that evil to occur and reoccur. Christ especially loved children. Christ knows and will hold accountable and punish anyone involved directly or indirectly in the cover-up or abuse of our Catholic Children because they blasphemed Him and used His church to do it. It does not matter who, why, or how important or what earthly position or power they hold Christ knows men’s hearts and He alone is pure Love and pure Justice. These children are our Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ, and all of you on this site should exercise more compassion and humility; it could be your child, or sister, or brother. To callously imply this is about money the same could be said about the churches response. Believe me you would have to be very seriously disturbed to purposely put yourself through a child sexual abuse “inquisition”. Sometimes it takes many years for an innocent child to recognize or remember the harm done to them as a child. I hope you never know that pain and betrayal, but Jesus is faithful to His promise and heals. Only Jesus knows the whole truth of man’s sins on earth. To those who said it was only “?”% of children or priests, I can only answer, even one child is too many for Jesus to excuse, and bound by His law it is too many for me to excuse. To all those who advised others on this site seeking The Truth to “believe it, or leave it” be warned Jesus is watching; it is not your church, it belongs to Christ and we are an invited guest through His gift of faith. He welcomes all to come to Him as His guest to His church.
Jesus will not allow His church to be perverted or redirected from His purpose for it. Catholics need to pray for Christ church on earth and be humble as He taught us by His love.
George,
Here are some of the reasons why the Protestant reformation was necessity:
1) the teaching and the sale of indulgences or the abuses thereof
2) simony
3) the selling and buying of clerical offices
The RCC at the time refused to deal with what the protestant reformers and even some RC leaders knew needed to be done. Just look at how your church treated Luther at the Diet of Worms.
Here is a quote from one of Luther’ 95 Thesis- “Thesis 86, which asks: “Why does the pope, whose wealth today is greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build the basilica of St. Peter with the money of poor believers rather than with his own money?”
This is just one example of the corruption that was apparent in the RCC.
Have you studied church history?
Alvin—show me the documentation for YOUR claim. Nowhere can that be proved. The book list above is a good place for you to start learning the truth, my friend. Years ago “Dear Abby” named various religions and who their founder was. For the Roman Catholic Church she cited Christ as the founder—-and history has NEVER disputed that, since it is fact.
George,
It was actually the RCC that strayed from the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. Jude 3. The RCC teaches doctrines that the Lord Jesus nor His apostles ever taught.
“Historian” there is no need for a Catholic to attend a Protestant church. The Catholic Church has everything that Christ has provided for us—including His Body and Blood (the Real Presence). We listen to readings from the Old and New Testament and we listen to our choirs. Additionally, we have the Eastern Catholic Church—Maronite and can attend the Mass in Aramaic, the language Our Lord spoke. There is nothing for us to “learn” from Protestants that broke away from the Church established/founded by Christ, the Son of God, over 2000 years ago. It is the other way around. If being a Roman Catholic is being “brainwashed” —in your opinion—then I am happy to be so, but actually, I find my Faith a gift from God. By the way, what Catholic isn’t aware of the tele evangelists on TV?
JackKnife, I have many friends that believe differently than I, I think most of us here would not ask people what their beliefs are before we befriend them.
My friends can believe what they want, so long as they don’t make claims that are completely false. If a non-Catholic friend told me that we ‘worship’ Mary, I would have to correct her and explain our doctrine on Mary, as briefly and simply as I could.
Thanks for your little defense of the Church. None of us is guilty for any of the sins of our forefathers from the past, slavery is another one that comes to mind. We are only guilty of our own personal transgressions. But sometimes, when you think about it, our own sins can have long standing effect and can cause a lot of problems for our children and grandchildren. It’s not God burdening them, we do it ourselves.
Historian is spitting out the facts and everyone is getting mad. Yes, The Church has done horrific things before but remember, it was a different time. A man does not carry his father’s burden (sin)and catholics today are not guilty of what happened centuries ago. Yes I am defending the church but I also must say this, many of your clergy seem to wish for a time when they could put down people who disagreed with them. The problem isn’t religion, its the “Us vs Them mentality” that separates humankind. When I make friends, I do not care what they believe, etc. but that they are good people and trustworthy. That is needed on a global scale.
Hi, Jennifer!
THANK YOU for such an interesting column.
Have many people posting here EVER heard of so-called ‘interfaith’ meetings?
The trouble with totalitarianism is that it has totally brainwashed its members…...
At least, the First Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees that the individual citizen does, in fact, have the right to choose for her/himself what to believe/what NOT to believe DESPITE THE EFFORTS OF TOTALITARIAN clergy to convince the so-called ‘faithful’ otherwise…...
How many people posting here would be ah, comfortable, in, say, an atmosphere WHERE THEY COULD DEFINE THEIR BELIEFS FOR THEMSELVES—FREE OF INTERFERENCE FROM CLERICAL TOTALITARIANISM?
IMPOSSIBLE? THINK AGAIN!
HOW MANY PEOPLE WHO POST HERE KNOW anything ABOUT,say, the Unitarian-Universalists? Anyone? If not, why not!
Who, among the posters here, has ah, attended, say, an African Methodist Church and listened to their riveting sermons and stirring songs, and/or, say, a Spanish-speaking Pentecostal service-led by Pentecostal ministers who LOVE what they are doing—and can inspire their congregations!
What about attending say, a Greek Orthodox service—where the service is in Greek (duh!) and/or OTHER Orthodox churches—say, Roumanian/Russian, etc.
EVERYONE CAN LEARN SOMETHING FROM ATTENDING SERVICES BEYOND LEVELS OF PERSONAL COMFORT….....
“Some atheists insist that we call doubt a sin, no matter how many times they have been corrected.”
This is a popular misconception for one of three reasons:
1. Some priest or religious mistook questioning for disrespect and whacked them with a ruler for asking questions.
2. They come from a Protestant background where salvation is by “faith alone” and questioning faith is a literal sign of damnation. (And if the background is strict Calvinist, it is strong evidence that one is predestined to damnation.)
3. They heard this popular misconception from others.
There are hundreds of books on Catholic Apologetics that answer questions—if people read them. They are out there. Catholic historians do not hide facts or their work would be of no value.
Yes Thomas doubted and all Jesus did was answer his doubts. He did not condemn him, but some atheists insist that we call doubt a sin, no matter how many times they have been corrected.
This link posted by Christine: Posted by Christine on Friday, Jun 15, 2012 11:51 AM (EST):
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2007/10/atheists-and-an.html
Now I know where you get your misinformation from. And, why do atheists feel the need to use foul language so much? It does nothing to help their ‘cause’.
“Why should faith not be questioned?”
Faith should always be questioned.
But those who question must be open to answers. They must be willing to accept Truth when it is found. Otherwise one is preferring error to Truth, which is foolish.
In the Gospel, we see that St. Thomas doubted the resurrection, but Jesus answered his doubts. Thomas did not continue in his disbelief, but recognized the Truth that was before him.
Atheist books are biased and groundless, but I guess it figures that atheists would be attacking a Catholic web site. So that alone answers a lot of questions..
http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2007/10/atheists-and-an.html
Great book list, this should answer all questions posed b the disgruntled attackers on here. Where is their list??
Kathleen, you are correct—nobody ever dares to challenge or insult those sources you mention—but it seems Catholics are always considered “fair game”. The attackers are drawn to Catholic web sites to spew their hatred, but too cowardly to make a mumble against any other group (sect or religion).
Christine: these questions are for people who are considering leaving the Catholic Church. Based on your answers, it seems to me you were never in the Catholic Church. So you’re just using this forum as an excuse to insult Catholics. And Kathleen is absolutely right, that this type of bigotry would never be allowed a platform on Jewish or Muslim website. But the Catholics who you all accuse of being bigoted and intolerant let you have full reign on our site.
Just for perspective, can you imagine posting similar abusive remarks targeting Jews, Muslims,Hindus,etc on their particular sites?As a Christian I can’t.
“Triumph, The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church” by H. W. Crocker III (Catholic convert)
“How the Catholic Church Built Civilization” Thomas Woods, Jr. Ph.D
“Seven Lies About Catholic History” Diane Moczar, Ph. D.
:Why Catholics Are Right” Michael Coren (Catholic convert)
“History of Christianity” Paul Johnson (Catholic convert)
“Where We Got the Bible” Henry Graham
These sources found in the library and give an accurate unbiased view of the Roman Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ, who promised that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church.
(Some of the above authors are historians.)
Christine you ask: “Why should faith not be questioned?”
This article, if you read it and comprehended it, is about questions to ask yourself, before you decide to leave the Church. Geez. I really am losing my patience.
Re. religious bigotry, I think we see daily examples in some of these posts.
THANK YOU, CHRISTINE, for your comments.
One of the reasons that the ACLU, ETC EXIST is that religious bigots WOULD, IN FACT, LIKE TO IMPOSE their religious bigotry ON EVERYONE ELSE.
NEVER MIND THE FIRST AMENDMENT…................!
@Historian—you are making the mistake that these people give a damn about evidence—historical or scientific—when it threatens their “faith.” You will eventually become frustrated with their willful ignorance and their pride in their “reasoning” for defending the Church.
They are smart enough to rationalize their beliefs and, since they cannot convince you with reason, they will baffle you with bulls**t.
Question 1—It’s irrelevant.
Question 2—Faith is pretending something you don’t know. I will have a better life without it.
Question 3—Yes, and its actions which are even worse.
Question 4—No, they were inspired by greed and desire for power over others.
Question 5—Yes—see above.
.
Why should faith not be questioned?
The following quote is from a Church Father that the Roman Church calls a so-called ‘saint’:
The synagogue is not only a whorehouse and a theatre; it is a den of thieves and a haunt of wild animals….the Jews have no conception of things at all,but living for the lower nature…no better than pigs or goats…they live by the rule of debauchery….
Chrysostom also argued that the Jews would be crucified throughout history
because they crucified Christ:”..It is because you killed Christ.It is because you stretched your hand against the Lord. It is because you shed the precious blood, there is no restoration, no mercy any more and no defense…that is why you are being punished worse now than in the past…..’
Justin Martyr wrote:
Jewish misery bears testimony to God’s wrath which has fallen on those who refuse to accept Christ’
In 1096, in Speyer, Germany, jews were massacred by both French and German Catholics;during the Crusades, Jews suffered being massacred with regularity…...with the preachings of bigots like Bernard ofClairvaux (again, whom the Church refers to as a so-called ‘saint’.) During these massacres, ENTIRE Jewish communities were slaughtered in cold blood…..
In 1215, the Fourth Latern Council decreed that Jews must wear clothing that distinguished them from Christians…
In 1478, the papacy issued a bull that established the Inquisition in Castile, Spain; in 1492, Jews were totally expelled from Spain….
I could continue with this line of historical listings of treatment of Jews by the Roman Church….. nor, I drily note, have I touched on the Church’s burning of Jewish books and/or religious writings…... When Luther wrote his diatribe ON THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES (1543) he called for the total destruction of Jewish homes, businesses, synagogues, and killing of the Jewish people…....
I am NOT AT ALL APPOLOGETIC for pointing out the blatant hypocrisy of the Roman Church in claiming that it is ah, pro-life, WHEN IN FACT, IT IS NO SUCH THING.
French Protestants called Huguenots were massacred in France by the Church in the late 17th century….Many of them fled to what is now Charleston, South Carolina where they founded the Huguenot Church (1686) and contributed to the economy of the Colony….
GET IT, YET? THE ROMAN CHURCH IS not PRO-LIFE no matter what it says. HISTORY PROVES OTHERWISE!
Well said, Jennifer, once again.
Time to shut off the ‘HYSTERICAL’ troll HISTORIAN… He/she is probably off his/her meds.
Historian—So I am a bigot and an idiot—hahahhahh. More comic relief.. When losing an argument call the opponent names…right? Once again you have things wrong. You have absolutely no proof of any of your absurd and laughable accusations about the Catholic Church. Are you a teenager with time on your hands? Take up swimming or something… Catholic bashing just doesn’t work. That Bob Jones library is feeding you misinformation… They do put out a lot of comic books slamming the Catholic Church, is that your source? If not, where are your historical book titles for these claims? This is my last reply since it seems to throw you into a tizzy when I respond.
Unfortunately, for bigots like Patt and company, the historical record concerning the Roman Church’s persecutions and cold blooded murders of Jewish men, women and children is QUITE HISTORICALLY WELL DOCUMENTED. (*IN VARIOUS LANGUAGES.)
The Church is ALSO responsible for the mass murders of Protestant babies, children, pregnant women and men. For instance, the cold blooded murder of Hussites in medieval Bohemia, etc IS TOO HISTORICALLY WELL KNOWN FOR THE ROMAN CHURCH TO IGNORE; like Martin Luther, John Huss, one of the FIRST to demand religious freedom of expression, was burned at the stake as a ‘heretic’; his followers were hunted down and murdered in cold blood—excuse me, that includes women,babies and children.
PLEASE, PLEASE DO NOT attempt to claim that the Roman Church is, ah, pro-life.
I am NOT appologizing if the historical illiterates on this website are NOT familiar enough with history to ADMIT that the Vatican’s hands DRIP WITH THE BLOOD OF THE PERSECUTED AND THE MURDERED WHO did have the courage to JUST SAY NO! to being TOLD THAT THEY had to convert—- or, face being murdered in cold blood.
SO MUCH FOR THE CHURCH BEING A SUPPORTER OF LIFE…...DUH….........
Lol I’m catholic bashing? Thats a nice response, so I see how it works here. You don’t read in depth to my replies and vice versa. You seem to be dodging the point I am making, hell does not exist simply because of your belief in a religion. So somehow by being logical, I am catholic bashing; most I am doing is calling you out on faulty logic. On a further note, your petty insults don’t help your case. Also, Kathleen, thank you for the spelling correction. I usually try to keep my grammar top knotch.
Historian and Jacknife do not read the replies, but one thing they do while Catholic bashing—they provide comic relief. They sound like graduates of the Bob Jones “University” (probably where they get their error ridden data). Thanks guys, you are both very funny in your rants and name calling. Keep it up if that is how you get your cheap thrills, doesn’t bother me a bit…
I’m not sure it’s even wise to respond to some posts, but the previous comments regarding Judaism,the Catholic Church & respect for women were pretty amazing.
The Blessed Mother is Jewish.We hold her in the greatest esteem & are even accused by non-Catholics of worshipping her, a Jewish woman.
Orthodox Jews follow very strict codes re. the roles of men & women in family, dress, gender separation,marriage,etc. I’m not disrespecting any of those traditions & actually think there is much wisdom there, but one needs to study a bit deeper before stereotyping Catholics.
Posted by JackKnife on Sunday, Jun 10, 2012 11:40 PM (EST):@Patt, you seemed so concerned with an afterlife that you seem to not have any concern for this life and your actions. Also Patt, Russia is a real place, we have evidence it exists. Lots of people go there so to think Russia isn’t real would be extremely silly. Now hell on the other hand, thats a place that doesn’t exist in the natural world. You can’t compare that to Russia, your logic is falliable. Just like the pope, he’s a man with a title. Nothing special there. Also Alvin, let me take up for Reality here and say Prove hell exists first. Pascel’s Wager is a piece of crap anyway, you can’t ignore all the other dieties, heavens and hells with such a thing as Pascel’s Wager. Its a nice conversation starter if you just use Christianity and Athiesm. Also I’m a diest if you want to know my stance.”
*************
I’m guilty of many a typo myself, but at least spell Pascal’s name correctly before discarding his argument.(The Deists & atheists may respond to your spelling choices, too.)
Kathleen: exactly. The demographics of abuse victims within the Church are very different than those of society in general, and instances in the Church get much more media attention.
Bonnie,
This is not in reference to sexual abuse of minors within the Church, but within society overall.
I think you might find the largest number of minors affected by sexual abuse are young girls involved with older males.
In one school district that I’m familiar with, there is a fulltime position for teaching pregnant middle school girls, ages 11- 15.“Middle school” is 6th-8th Grade.)My son’s homeroom teacher left & took that teaching position.Most of the girls were from lower income homes & many were African American.Those stories don’t seem to make the nightly news.
Bonnie: I don’t have the statistics handy, but the percentage of female victims is definitely much lower than male victims, and the highest percentage of victims are adolescent males, which certainly supports your theory.
Does anyone out there have any thoughts about the largest problem with child sexual abuse is not so much pedophiles but homosexual men who happen to like boys as well as men. I think many gay men entered the priesthood because it was a place where they could live their lives and weren’t expected to get married and had access to a lot of other men and boys. Maybe some thought they could get over being gay or didn’t realize they were gay. I think the media missed the boat here by blaming it all on pedophilia instead of gay men. Maybe because it would be bad PR for the gay community to put it that way. Whenever you hear about it, it’s mostly boys who were abused. Does anyone know the percentage of those children who were girls? I bet it’s very low. I certainly hope and pray the Church does a better job weeding out those who can not live a life of holiness and castity.
JackKnife: what makes you think Patt doesn’t have any concern for the actions in this life?
Patt: I guess we can be glad that at least JackKnife didn’t take a week to respond to you this time, and at least he didn’t call you an idiot like some other eloquent commenters.
@Patt, you seemed so concerned with an afterlife that you seem to not have any concern for this life and your actions. Also Patt, Russia is a real place, we have evidence it exists. Lots of people go there so to think Russia isn’t real would be extremely silly. Now hell on the other hand, thats a place that doesn’t exist in the natural world. You can’t compare that to Russia, your logic is falliable. Just like the pope, he’s a man with a title. Nothing special there. Also Alvin, let me take up for Reality here and say Prove hell exists first. Pascel’s Wager is a piece of crap anyway, you can’t ignore all the other dieties, heavens and hells with such a thing as Pascel’s Wager. Its a nice conversation starter if you just use Christianity and Athiesm. Also I’m a diest if you want to know my stance.
HEY, PATT…..
OBVIOUSLY, you are just ANOTHER idiot who CANNOT ACCEPT HISTORICAL REALITY FOR WHAT IT IS.
DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND GO TO A GOOD LIBRARY AND DO THE necessary RESEARCH, IDIOT!
Historian must have given himself a degree in history, and as the saying goes,“He who undertakes to be his own teacher has a fool for a pupil.” Or “He that teaches himself has a fool for a master”. Proving this point is the faulty and error filled comments ( IN CAPITAL LETTERS) coming from “Historian”. You are making up your anwers as you go along and they are wrong. Catholic bash somewhere else…
Yes “Historian”, admitting that the Catholic Church is hypocritical and misogynist is difficult for me, because it is untrue. Just as responding with anything other than hysterical caps is difficult for you. I’m with Joan; your hyper rants are not really worth the time and effort to respond to.
Oh, and Historian, the reason I asked you for resources is because a Google search turned up nothing about the “Vatican condoning or causing cold-blooded murder of Jewish women.” I did find a disgusting, anti-Semitic site claiming Jews were involved with murdering Christians, which I do not believe either. Just reinforces my assessment that your sources are fanatical and unreliable. Good-bye.
Historian, I will not address your hysterical rants, and writing in CAPS. You come across as an angry, irrational, bigot. Good day.
I AM IN LOVE WITH JESUS…...HE CALLS US TO BE HOLY….I TAKE UP MY CROSS AND FOLLOW HIM EVERYWHERE….ALL THE WAY TO CALVARY…...there is no other option….the road is narrow that leads to eternal LIFE. All honor and glory to God. He gives us all the sacraments to sustain us on this pilgrim journey….Our Lady helps us with her intercessory prayers…the saints have lived and died for this and are our role models when times get tough. Blessings on Corpus Christi Sunday! PAX,
To those ladies who continue to post and DEFEND rampant misogynist, hypocrisy—maybe YOU should ask yourselves a question:
CAN YOU NAME even ONE female PRIEST, BISHOP, CARDINAL, ETC…..
NO, YOU CANNOT. THINK ABOUT IT. THINK ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF MISOGYNISTS WHO hate YOU!
Joan62,
PLEASE,PLEASE do yourself a favor!
There is an institution called a LIBRARY. In said institution, you can research most subjects that you are interested in…..
DO YOURSELF A FAVOR. CHECK OUT MATERIALS—BOOKS, VIDEOS, ETC THAT DISCUSS THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF THE ROMAN CHURCH IN THE COLD-BLOODED ATTEMPTS TO DESTROY JEWS, JUDAISM AND/OR VARIOUS PROTESTANT GROUPS WHO did HAVE THE COURAGE TO CONTINUE despite THE ATTEMPTS OF ROME TO DESTROY THEM!
Claire,
A real PhD in History is exactly that—REAL.
I am so sorry that YOU do not respect YOUR OWN SEX enough to see through the BLATANT hatred of YOUR OWN SEX BY A FEMALE-HATING, MISOGYNIST religious institution.
IF YOU DOUBT THE CONDONING BY THE VATICAN OF COLD BLOODED MURDER OF JEWISH PEOPLE IN EUROPE, you ARE THE ONE who needs to DO THE RESEARCH.IF YOU doubt the cold blooded murder of French Protestants—women, babies, children, and men AGAIN YOU are the one who needs to do the research!
ADMITTING THAT THE ROMAN CHURCH IS BOTH MISOGYNIST AND HYPOCRITICAL seems to be really, really DIFFICULT for you….
PS DID you EVER HAVE A BAT MITZVAH!!!!!
Claire, Historian is obviously a very angry and confused person. And he/she comes up with statements about the Church condoning cold blooded murder, yet without any references to back this up, then claims we don’t have the courage to repudiate his hysterical rants.
Jennifer,
You sound brain-washed!
The Roman Church is, of course, waging war on females. THERE IS NOT one FEMALE IN any DECISION-MAKING, POWER-CONTROLLING role in the Roman Church.Rather obviously, misogynist, female-hating men do NOT want to admit that they hate females to begin with and seek to dominate women and violate their rights….
ANY HISTORICALLY LITERATE person can point out that THE CHURCH HAS TRADITIONALLY CONDONED THE COLD BLOODED MURDER OF WOMEN, BABIES, CHILDREN AND MEN IN POPULATIONS WHO refused TO ACCEPT THE BIGOTRY OF THE ROMAN CHURCH….JEWS; EUROPEAN PROTESTANTS WHO refused TO GO AGAINST THEIR CONSCIENCES, ETC.
WHY DON’T you HAVE the courage to REPUDIATE the Church’s misogynist hypocrisy concerning its hatred of women!
HISTORIAN, I happen to be half-Jewish, and my father (who’s Jewish) is in fact a real historian, and your outlandish claims do not impress me (and neither do the constant caps that adorn your comments). Abortion is murder, and the Church is not anti-women.
Claire,
In case you aren’t aware, the Roman Church is WAGING WAR ON WOMEN. PERIOD.
The misogynist, hypocritical institution that CLAIMS that ‘abortion is murder’ has, been VERY, VERY GUILTY of coldly murdering Jewish women, babies, children and men for the ‘crime’ of being Jewish and refusing to convert to Catholicism. The SAME institution ALSO permitted cold-blooded murder of NON-CATHOLICS (Protestants) like (Huguenots) including women, babies, children and men.
The Church does NOT have a CONSTITUTIONAL OR RELIGIOUS RIGHT to force its female-hating doctrines on American women!
Please, for your own sake, READ THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND/OR THE HISTORY OF FREEDOM OF RELIGION—FREEDOM from religion in American history!
Alvin,
A Bar/bat mitzvah is a ceremony that is performed when a boy is 13 and/or a girl is 12. It marks the child’s first reading of the Hebrew Scriptures in public and giving a speech on the meaning of the verses that s/he has read. Like any of the sacraments that apply to children like First Communion, the Bar/bat mitzvah is a rite of passage.
Obviously, the Jewish people do NOT believe that Jesus is a divine being.In fact, the BASIC prayer of Judaism is:“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE.’
For many centuries, Jews were persecuted for REFUSING to convert to ANY kind ofChristianity—Catholicism—or Protestantism.
Further, ONLY since the Holocaust/end of WWII has the Church even tried to deal with its hatred of the Jewish people!
Steve B, thank you for your respectful response. Regarding your second paragraph: I don’t expect you to believe based on my reasons for believing. There is no one who made me believe based on a convincing argument. I came to a solid belief based on my own experiences, prayer, reading the Bible and having it come across as True to me, looking into Church history, reading Saint’s writings, and then lastly, it was, I believe God working in my heart and mind and soul. Ultimately it is God that reveals Himself to us interiorly(sp?)
Regarding your last paragraph and comment: I am so sorry about the death of your loved one. And it sounds like you were very respectful of the others’ beliefs at the time. You may not like to hear this but God does not work the way we expect Him to or think He will. He does not come to us on our terms, we come to Him on His terms. What I’m trying to say is you may think that a certain situation is perfect for God to “reveal” Himself to you, but we don’t tell God what He should do. God knows what is best for us, how and when we may be most open to Him. I know for myself, if certain things that happened to me that helped solidfy my faith had happened when I was much younger, I would not have been ready for it and my faith would have remained barely there. God knows when the time is right for us to be more accepting of His workings in our souls.
You may have tried this already, perhaps not- but what is the harm in praying to God, if He is there, to reveal Himself to you? He will most likely do it in subtle ways, and maybe not right away, but if you are genuinely sincere, like- God I don’t think you are real, and if so, which god are you? But, if you do exist, I want to know you and love you, so please show yourself to me, in whatever way you choose. If you are the loving, merciful God of Christians, (or whatever), please give me this faith in you-
Or something to that effect. I really, truly believe, that if you are genuinely seeking and sincere and humble, AND open, your prayer will be answered positively within a short period of time. But remember, God proposes, he doesn’t impose, He is the ‘still, small voice’, so it is not likely that he will come to you like a ‘ton of bricks’.
The best evidence for the existence of God is Christ. That’s why Paul says that he preaches only one thing - Christ and Him crucified. Jesus’ question at Caesarea Philippi is the essential question for all humanity, “Who do you say that I am?” You have to answer this for yourself. Who is Jesus - myth, man or the Christ, the Son of the Living God, the Eternal Word spoken by the Father through whom all things are made. I think you know my answer. By the way, to tie this back to the original thread, it was Simon Peter’s answer to this question that established him as the Rock upon which the Catholic Church is built. So if your answer is C, why would you leave His own church despite all its imperfections?
steve b,
Design and fine-tuning has not been refuted multiple times. If anything, the more science discovers things the greater need for a creator. The earth alone has over 100 fine tuned characteristics that make life possible. If any of these things were much different than they are we would not be here to talk about it.
Sorry to hear about the loss of your friend. Death is never easy to handle even when a person believes in life after death. I suspect its even harder when you believe this is all there is.
Just because God has not revealed Himself to you in a way you can recognize Him does not mean He won’t later. If you seek for Him with all your heart and soul you will find Him. (Deuteronomy 4:29).
Give it time and keep seeking. Keep knocking. Keep praying.
HISTORIAN,
What are you rambling about????
HEY, ALVIN!
WHY NOT JUST ATTEND A BAR/BAT MITZVAH SERVICE WHERE A TWELVE/THIRTEEN YEAR OLD STUDENT WHO HAS STUDIED THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES FOR SOME YEARS READS FROM SCRIPTURES IN PUBLIC FOR THE FIRST TIME AND MAKES A DISCOURSE ABOUT WHAT H/SHE HAS JUST READ…..
YOU MIGHT EVEN learn SOMETHING!
joan: I’m not going to bother with refuting your and Alvin’s design argument. Design and fine-tuning have been refuted multiple times (a universe 13 billion light-years across, comprised as we’re finding more and more of dark matter, and only has life on one planet that can only support life on some of its surface some of the time? Nice design! Plus if it were true, it’s not proof that the christian God did it) Here’s a little broader refutation to get you started: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Fine-tuning_argument.
I’d really like to talk about your last sentence. You couldn’t be more wrong on two counts. One, I’ve said before and I’ll say again that I’m open to the idea of a God if the right evidence came along. Your personal experiences don’t cut ice in that regard. I don’t accept personal testimony about outlandish claims any more than you would, I think, accept a follower of another religion’s personal claims about their faith if they tried to tell you their faith was true and yours wasn’t right. I simply feel the same skepticism about catholicism/christianity that you do about other faiths.
Second, I recently lost someone close to me and attended the funeral in a Catholic-oriented type service. If there was ever I time for God to show me a sign, that would have been it. I was in the church, praying in a prayer circle with the priest and my family, and I was in a great deal of pain. In all that though, I didn’t feel a voice or see a sign that God was watching out for us or helping usher our loved one to his kingdom. All I knew is I just lost someone close to me, she’s not coming back and I’ll never see her again. You might say that’s a cold and heartless view of it. Well first off, I didn’t dare say it during the service. That would indeed be cold. Second, I feel grief and sadness at someone’s death all the more because I think that’s all it is. I have all the same emotions as a theist: love, pain, joy, grief. I just don’t take any false consolation or give my grief a placebo that my loved ones are with a supernatural entity that hasn’t been shown objectively to exist. If there was ever a time for God to make himself known to me, wouldn’t while I’m mourning a death be it?
HISTORIAN,
What “ORIGINAL LANGUAGES—INCLUDING THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS—DO not PROVE THE CHURCH’S claims about Jesus….” What are you referring to? We know the gospels were written in Greek and have thousands of copies of them. These gospels all state that Jesus is God and died for sin.
What historical research do you have that shows otherwise?
BTW- you strike me a fundamentalist atheist. Would that be correct?
HEY, ALVIN…..
THE HISTORICAL RECORDS—in the ORIGINAL LANGUAGES—INCLUDING THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS—DO not PROVE THE CHURCH’S claims about Jesus….
UNFORTUNATELY FOR YOU, THE HISTORICAL RESEARCH CONCERNING SO-CALLED ‘HISTORICAL RECORDS’ WHICH prove THAT WHAT THE CHURCH SAYS IS ‘historically accurate’ DO NOT in fact, SUPPORT THE CHURCH’S CLAIMS ABOUT JESUS….
THE ROMAN CHURCH, FOR ALL ITS CLAIMS, IS JUST AS FUNDAMENTALIST AS any BIGOTED SOUTHERN BAPTIST!
One other thing: I am not saying that I do not believe in Evolution. The evidence is there to support it. I believe as do many, that evolution does NOT prove that God does not exist, it only shows one of the many aspects of the brilliance of God.
Steve b: Alvin’s explanation will suffice w/regard to the scientific evidence of the finely tuned universe. Even watching secular shows on the Science channel (not syfy), Discovery, etc., the evidence to me is astounding. Of course the scientists on these shows call it Evolution and speak of Evolution as if it is an Intelligent Being (ie: God) when they say things like, “Evolution decided to…”, “Evolution created…”, “Evolution wisely chose to…”. I’m not making these up. There is a program called The Universe I believe is the name, and you hear comments like the above often.
Other than that, it is not up to human beings to convince or prove to others of God’s existence.
With regard to 1Peter 3:15, the quote is “but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you…” We are not expected to give evidence or proof that God exists, just to defend our faith and try to explain to the best of our ability why we believe in Him. My explanation: I truly believe that I have seen God at work in my life and the lives of others, there have been miracles throughout history that still cannot be explained, the more I pray and ask God for the grace to love Him and others more I find these prayers being answered, I really do feel an inner peace when I place my trust and confidence in Him, 2000 years of past Christian saints’ lives and witness to the work of God in their experiences is pretty compelling to me-read some of these saints, they are very sane, intelligent, down to earth and reasonable. What else? When I compare the history of Judeo/Christianity and what it is all about, with Atheism, it just makes more sense to me-it seems more reasonable and realistic to believe in the God of the Bible than not, or to believe in any other ‘gods’ that the world believes in. Also, the Catholic Church’s teachings really do make the most sense to me, to put it simply.
You may want to pick apart my reasoning, but as I said above, I am only expected to give you an explanation for why I believe as I do, only God can bring you to faith in Him. There are a lot more reasons I give for the Hope that is in me, but this is already long, and I’m not sure that you really want to know anyway.
steve b,
There is excellent evidence for the existence of God i.e. the creation of the universe, its design and fine tuning and the life of Christ to name a few pieces of evidence. You also know of His existence because He has made His existence clearly evident to you in your heart and mind and you can see His work in creation that surrounds you.
HISTORIAN,
You wrote-“Even before high school, I knew that the Church could NOT HISTORICALLY PROVE ITS CLAIMS ABOUT JESUS.
NONE OF THE HISTORICAL SOURCES prove’ THE CHURCH’S CLAIMS ABOUT JESUS, RISING FROM THE DEAD, ETC.TODAY’S HISTORIANS CAN EASILY dis-PROVE CHURCH DOCTRINES!”
This statement is patently incorrect. There is more evidence for Christ than any figure of ancient history. His resurrection from the dead is one of the best attested events of history and has excellent eyewitness support. No historian has ever disproved it and in fact many people have tried to disprove the resurrection and have come to the conclusion that He did indeed rise from the dead.
joan: If you speak to most atheists they’ll tell you they would be willing to acknowledge that a god exists if the evidence is put forth to them. You’re the one who says that God (specifically the christian God) exists, another poster named Patt is convinced that hell exists. The burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate that they do. These are audacious claims as you say, and they require extraordinary evidence, and it’s incumbent on you to put forth the evidence that they do, because you’re the one making the positive claim. I hate to be the one pulling Bible quotes in this discussion, but the Bible does in fact direct you to give a reason for your belief when called on, in contrast to your previous post (1 Peter 3-15).
EileenG,
.
Perhaps it is different living in a secular state such as Massachusetts, but here in North Carolina, right wing politics puts the Church in league with people who think it’s OK to beat the gay out of their kids or who want to put them in concentration camps. And I won’t even get into what conservative North Carolinians think of immigrants or even Catholics as a whole. That bothers me far more than the secular left.
“It is infuriating to live in this culture where those of us of traditional mindset and values, (and I am an ex-liberal) are constantly insulted and provoked by the Left. You must admit that this is true. We (the Church) are being forced to take the stands we are taking Make no mistake about it!”
.
Why is your “traditional mindset and values” dependent on social approval and must be enshrined in the law? Are they too weak to stand on their own merits?
The HHS Mandate (which WILL be struck down by the Courts) has been beaten to death, but what about right wing immigration laws? Where is EWTN (from Irondale, Alabama) on Alabama’s unjust immigration law, which the bishops have condemned as a violation of religious freedom? Nothing. Apparently only violations of religious freedom from the left are important.
.
And if a handful of gay couples can really destroy marriage, then, quite frankly, marriage deserves to die.
While I absolutely accept the Church’s teachings in matters of faith and morals, which are protected from error by the power of the Holy Spirit, it must be admitted that many evils exist within its structure because it is composed by fallen human beings. Despite all that, know this: To leave the Church is to forsake the Eucharist, the Body and Blood of Christ. What perceived benefit could be the equal of that tragic loss?
“While I may be one of the only ones in this thread posting about feeling like the hard shift to the political right in the church is disagreeable to many Catholics, I am not the only one who feels this way. But if you want to know why mass attendance is down so much and ex-Catholics are such a numerous group that they would be the third largest denomination in the U.S. this has a lot to do with it. Catholic now equals radical right politics, and those of us who don’t share those politics are welcomed to leave. So we do.”
.
I agree completely.
.
I think many Catholics who get into the right wing politics don’t realize what they are implying when they get so political. I’ve seen posts on this site that seem to imply that the Church that survived Nero and Diocletian, Hitler and Stalin, may not survive a President with mediocre approval ratings and a Congress and Court system that opposes his every move. Seriously??? Who would want to be part of such a weak faith?
.
They think that in a world where divorce is rampant that the small percentage of the population that are in monogamous same-sex relationships is going to “destroy marriage” by changing the civil (not religious) definition of the term. Once again, who would want to be part of such a weak faith?
.
Furthermore, they ignore the injustices committed by the right against fellow Catholics, especially the toll our unjust immigration system is taking on immigrant families, many of whom are Catholic. While most Anglo Catholics vote Republican, the overwhelming number of Hispanic Catholics vote Democratic, to a certain degree because of immigration. Do these Catholics not exist, or are their needs unimportant? Once again, who would want to be part of such a weak faith?
.
The Church’s message is an overall positive one. They don’t call it the “good news” for nothing. But right wing politics are a politics of gloom and doom and it doesn’t make Christianity or the Church very attractive.
Holly, where to begin? The Church is probably the biggest charitable organization in the world. Catholic Charities, Catholic hospitals, Catholic schools, CCD, Knights of Columbus, St. Vincent DePaul societies, soup kitchens, AA, NA meetings, Legion of Mary, etc., on and on. But that’s not what you mean, is it? Baptism, confession, communion, confirmation, marriage, holy orders, sacrament of the sick, daily Mass, hospital ministries, prison ministries, prayers of the faithful, prayers for the dead, prayers for the church, prayers for the world, all offered free of charge universally and daily by priests and lay people alike, but that doesn’t do it for you either? Government programs regardless of their effectiveness, regardless of their prohibition against religious teaching, regardless of the waste, corruption and culture of dependence, that’s what you’re talking about isn’t it? The article wasn’t about why people leave the church. In the end it’s always about giving in to Satan. The article is about questions you should ask before you do. So who does more for the poor, NARAL or the Church; how can you do more for the poor, increasing food stamp funding or working in your church’s soup kitchen or social ministries service; what’s more effective, voting for “progressive” candidates or praying the rosary. To paraphrase a famous Catholic, ask not what your church can do for you ask what you can do for your church.
Holly - The first and most important service provided in the CPC’s is counseling. We walk with the clients who come to us through their pregnancy, and until the child is out of infancy, (in my center, the client must be <22 weeks pregnant, and we see her until her child is one year old.)
.
During the time we see our clients, counseling (options, pregnancy and childbirth, parenting, relationships, sexual integrity, spiritual and emotional) is offered. The way the sessions go depend on where the client is in her life and relationships. Our clients appreciate the help, and for many, we are the only people who listen to them, and we try to deliver honest and direct advice and sympathy. We are Christian, but don’t force anyone to see things our way. We offer prayer, if desired, (which is not an inconsiderable gift).
.
For our clients, we offer considerable material support, including, but not limited to, food, baby food, diapers, formula, toiletries, books, nursing supplies, maternity clothes, and the loan of extensive donated baby furniture. We note our clients’ birthdays and all other childrens’ info, and we have the luxury of presenting, (if donations allow) beautiful layettes and new baby gifts of new items for the mothers. One of my colleagues once declared that her job was wonderful - she got to give out beautiful and useful things to babies, and could talk about Jesus - the CPC’s are oases of love and care ins a cruel and often dark and cold world.
.
Volunteering at a CPC is one way to witness the work of Christ in our debauched, morally dissipated and sad world.
Holly - Your comments really trouble me, but I take heart in the responses of joanp62 and others. Two things to add:
.
1. I am a prolife counselor in a Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC) and believe me, much more is done by godly Christian women (of all denominations) than the baby bottle collections, (which collect cash for the centers, by the way). The centers, I am convinced, are some of the places where Jesus is present, to clients and staff alike. They are incredible and wonderful. Try finding anything good or holy or peaceful in an abortion clinic.
.
2. Your feeling that the Church is going hard right is somewhat true to my perception, but I, for one, love that this is happening. For years, here in Massachusetts, I have watched horrible developments in the culture, from a state Supreme Court that shoved ‘gay’ marriage upon us, without a popular vote, on a 5-4 decision basis, then a few years later, threw out over 80,000 petition signatures to bring the redefinition of marriage to a vote - Are these actions right or good? NO! It is infuriating to live in this culture where those of us of traditional mindset and values, (and I am an ex-liberal) are constantly insulted and provoked by the Left. You must admit that this is true. We (the Church) are being forced to take the stands we are taking Make no mistake about it!
.
3. I am sorry for any cradle Catholic leaving. My Church and faith mean so much to me, and I am proud to be in a community of faith, clear morals and service. It is so sad to hear of your plight. I was there several years ago, but had a prolife conversion. You sound like too nice a person not to be prolife.
If you do continue, maybe you could do so in all-caps, which adds a lot to your credibility.
While I was raised as a so-called ‘cradle Catholic’ I had the courage to question Catholicism and made the decision to quit. I am glad that I did.
I became what is referred to as a Jew-by-Choice; that is, a person who intentionally chooses to become Jewish.
Even before high school, I knew that the Church could NOT HISTORICALLY PROVE ITS CLAIMS ABOUT JESUS.
NONE OF THE HISTORICAL SOURCES prove’ THE CHURCH’S CLAIMS ABOUT JESUS, RISING FROM THE DEAD, ETC.TODAY’S HISTORIANS CAN EASILY dis-PROVE CHURCH DOCTRINES!
IS THE CHURCH EVIL? IN A WORD, YES!
THE CHURCH is THE ORIGIN OF ANTI-JUDAISM; CLAIMS LIKE ‘YOU ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL(CHRYSOSTOM) AND WORSE…..THE CHURCH PERSECUTED JEWS FOR THEIR REFUSAL TO BECOME CATHOLICS; STARTED GHETTOS TO SEPERATE JEWS FROM THEIR CHRISTIAN NEIGHBORS; MADE JEWS WEAR SPECIAL CLOTHING SO THAT THEY COULD BE RIDICULED, SCORNED AND MOCKED—AND, OF COURSE, HITLER BORROWED THE SAME IDEA WHEN HE FORCED JEWS TO WEAR YELLOW STARS OF DAVID—before BEING DEPORTED TO THE CONCENTRATION/DEATH CAMPS. THE CHURCH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BURNING JEWISH BOOKS (THE TALMUD)—AND OTHERS, AS WELL;FOR ROUTINELY ROUNDING UP ENTIRE JEWISH VILLAGES, FORCING THEM INTO SYNAGOGUES AND BURNING THEM—MEN, WOMEN, CHILDREN—ALIVE FOR THE crime OF BEING JEWISH.
I COULD CONTINUE, BUT MANY WELL WRITTEN BOOKS THAT DISCUSS THE CHURCH’S HATRED OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE AND THE RESULTS EXIST.
Well, in my area, there are pregnancy care centers which provide formula, diapers, baby equipment, maternity clothes, help the mothers get hooked up with WIC, medicaid, food pantries, childcare, job training, housing referrals, adoption referrals, etc.
Getting back to the welcoming thing: I struggled with infertility for years, and ministry within the Church for infertility is minimal. So I definitely relate to feeling unwelcome, and I don’t claim that there is not room for improvement. Also, as I mentioned, when it comes to fellowship and hospitality, we could learn a lot from our Protestant brothers and sisters.
Can you please tell me about some of the other things the pro-life movement does to help the women who they convince to keep their babies, besides the bottle drives? If they are doing things like providing free child care or sizable amounts of food, I may view the movement more favorably than I do now.
Sure, I’m concerned about people feeling unwelcome in the Church. But that doesn’t mean that I think the Church should place less emphasis on the holocaust of abortion (and by the way, hormonal contraception can function as an abortifacient, hence the Church’s opposition to charities that endorse contraception) in order to make people feel welcome. I do agree with other criticisms about how the Church is not welcoming enough (lack of fellowship, etc), and I am definitely concerned about those areas.
And by the way, if you think the only effort the pro-life movement makes to help mothers is bi-annual bottle drives, you are sorely mistaken.
Although you say the church does many other things to help the needy, they’re also wasting valuable resources on fighting gay marriage and cutting off funding to charities that discuss birth control. Which again is not to say they should change their stance on those things - they’re just so concerned with them to the point that it does result in fewer people bein helped because of the diverted funds. I know a significant number of women in my parish who are both very anti-welfare and are active in the right to life cause, and they think that a twice-yearly collection of baby bottles will be anywhere close to sufficient for the very real needs of the women they convince to keep their babies. I know I’m not going to change anyone’s mind, nor am I trying to do so. However the whole purpose of this article, as far as I could tell, was to question why people are leaving the church. I stated that I find it very difficult to stay in the church because of what I perceive as an over-emphasis on the abortion issue. In response I hear that no, there’s not an over-emphasis on abortion, but if there were you would be happy about it. I do thank you for these responses though, because it confirmed that it is not all in my head and in addition that I’m most likely correct that no one is concerned that I feel unwelcome in this church. While I may be one of the only ones in this thread posting about feeling like the hard shift to the political right in the church is disagreeable to many Catholics, I am not the only one who feels this way. But if you want to know why mass attendance is down so much and ex-Catholics are such a numerous group that they would be the third largest denomination in the U.S. this has a lot to do with it. Catholic now equals radical right politics, and those of us who don’t share those politics are welcomed to leave. So we do. At this rate I’m likely to be next, but at least you’ll have the smaller, “purer” church with less variation in individual thought like you want.
Holly, as Claire said, the Church does focus quite a bit on abortion with so many millions of lives aborted yearly, it makes sense. However, to come to the conclusion that the Church is neglecting all other needs is quite ridiculous! Matter of fact, like Claire, I don’t think we hear enough about the evils of abortion from the pulpit. The Church also doesn’t need you or anyone else to remind her about the spiritual and corporal works of mercy, of which the Pro-Life movement is doing very good works in both of these areas.
The Church is not just about abortion, and I never said that was all it was about. I said that it was justified for abortion to be a major focus of the Church, and I stand by that. Millions of babies being killed every year are certainly “people who really need support”, and defending them is in fact a spiritual and corporal act of mercy. And the Church does plenty of charity work in other areas, too. Catholic Charities is the single largest charitable organization in the world, and abortion is not its only charity. I have plenty of Catholic friends who talk about many other topics besides abortion, and I rarely hear about abortion at Mass.
I think you’re misunderstanding me. I fully accept and acknowledge that the church has always been anti-abortion, but it was never the major focus of our faith like it has been in recent years. I support the church in being against abortion, but that doesn’t mean I want to hear about it all the time. I’m not having an abortion, no one I know had abortions, but I do know an awful lot of people who are suffering from poverty and physical and mental illness. By focusing the vast majority of our attention as a church on abortion it is leaving out all of these people who really need support. When I meet with other Catholic friends I’d like it if they could talk about something in addition to abortion once in a while. And actually the abortion rate hasnt rapidly increased; it’s actually down in the majority of women, but is increasing among low-income women. That sadly does not surprise me at all because this country is cutting back so drastically on assistance to low-income families and churches can’t fill that gap. Honestly I find it so frustrating that people like Claire do seem to think that its okay for the church to be only about abortion. Why not just call every mass and church activity a right to life meeting and stop pretending it’s about any other aspect of our alleged faith (like you know, the spiritual and corporal acts of mercy?)
Joan: I feel the same way about the conservative/liberal labels. I really hate to pigeon-hole myself into either category, but if I had to, at this point conservative comes closer.
Holly, the Church, by the very fact of Her teachings for the past 2000 years, could never be called ‘liberal’ as we understand the word liberal at this time in our country. I prefer to call myself Catholic more than liberal or conservative, but I do believe that most conservative values fall closer to Catholicism than do liberal ones. The Church has always been against abortion, contraception, same sex marriages, etc. It’s just that now, the secular world is trying and has been trying to make these things appear to be normal and good, so the Church is speaking out more now since these things have become more pervasive in our society.
Holly: abortion is addressed in the Bible, in the commandment against murder. It has gained more focus in the Church because the rate of abortion has rapidly increased, and the state sanction of murder deserves a lot of attention. It’s pretty sad that something like that would push you out of the church.
Jacknife yawn- it took you a full week to respond to my mild post. I am glad you are at peace with yourself, so am I. So you don’t believe in God or eternity? So what? Do you want somebody to convince you? There are many things in this world I do not see, but I know they exist. I have never been to Russia but i am sure it is there. So you continue to think anyway you wish, God gave you that free will. Good luck to you in the next life, I hope you don’t end up cursing yourself for all eternity for your mistake when on earth.
Best wishes.
I am so disturbed to read the number of comments here basically telling people who don’t agree with church doctrines essentially “good riddance.” I get why people leave the Catholic church because I struggle with staying too. The hardest part for me is seeing how much the church has changed since I was a kid growing up in the 70s and 80s. Yes, the church has always taken a stance against contraception and abortion and that was difficult for many to accept, but when I was growing up neither was the extreme focus of the church the way it is now. Catholic used to equal liberal - and yes even at that time the Democrats had the exact same positions they do now. It’s not like in the 80s the Democrats were pro life any more than they are now. When did it change so that Catholicism became all abortion all the time? I am personally anti abortion and anti-hormonal contraception, but these issues aren’t even explicitly addressed in the Bible, let alone to such an extent that they should be the primary issues related to our religion. It really seems like now if you’re not a diehard Right to Life crusader you’re not welcome to call yourself Catholic anymore. And that in a nutshell is what is pushing me out of the church. I didn’t change - the emphasis of the church did .
Sarah ,
You are right about God not caring so much about labels.Our Lord Himself stated the questions He would ask us when we “reach the gates of Heaven.” Those questions were whether we had cared for Him through works of charity towards others-“the least of My brothers”.
Our Lord is physically present in the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.The Sacraments help give us the strength to live out our Faith.The Catholic Church has the fullness of Christ’s teachings.There are so many incredibly cool things & sources of grace available to us as Catholics.
I know our Faith has been poorly taught in my generation & many of us fail to comprehend the beauty & truth of Catholic teaching.Please don’t give up on your Faith.Maybe watch the “Catholicism” series by Fr. Barron?I can really recommend those DVD’s.Perhaps other readers will have ideas for you, too.
Glad you’re still “reading” the Catholic Register.Please know I will be praying for you.
God bless!
Reality,
How do you know hell does not exist? Merely rejecting it does not make it so. Unless you have proof positive it does not exist it is foolish to live as if it does not.
I have a question for you. Do you think God cares what denomination of Jesus that we chose to claim?
I was a cradle Catholic and recently stopped going to Mass (in Nov) but I have been attending a non denominational Christian church for the past 1.5 years where I am fed more spiritually then Mass has ever done for me. I know Jesus is in this body of believers and I know He’s there in Mass and in the Catholic Church. He’s also in other churches as well. But I honestly don’t think God is going to care what label we gave ourselves when we reach the gates of Heaven.
Maria, I am sorry for all the pain you went through.
Joanp is correct, however. From what you told us you are the victim of a poorly taught priest (I assume). Divorce itself, especially in such dire circumstances, carries no penalty in the Catholic Church.
God Bless you,
Chris
True, Kathleen. For Catholics, while abortion may be a priority, our religious charities, and ourselves personally,hopefully, care for the poor as Whole persons, body and soul. I believe without love of God there can be no true love for others, and that is where secular institutions fail.
Joanp62 ,
I agree, without life there is no hope.
The main thrust of international secular aid to the poor these days seems to be to get rid of the poor rather than to care for them.
One Foot Out: I would also like to add to what Clair said about abortion- it is so important because where there is life there is still hope, the poor and marginalized are alive and therefore there is still hope for things to get better for them even if it is a small hope, with abortion, these persons do not even have a chance at life at all, there is no more hope for them.
Also, when we pray to the Saints, they are not DEAD people. They are alive in heaven with God, therefore they are closer to God than anyone can be here on earth, they have fought the good fight, and we honor God by venerating his Saints, His ‘works of art’ sort of. We believe that at death, our souls and our consciousness leaves our bodies, but we are aware and alive, even if our bodies are no longer.
One Foot Out: abortion takes precedence over most issues because it is a horrifying epidemic with a huge magnitude. No one is saying that you can’t go to Jesus directly in prayer. But intercessary prayer, whether from a living friend or a friend in Heaven, has its merit, too. The girlscouts are being investigated because there have been links to Planned Parenthood, including inappropriate material being distributed to young girls.
“Reality”: it sounds like you’ve never been in the Church, so you’re not leaving it, and therefore these questions aren’t for you. If you find the Church so useless, why waste time and energy commenting on a Catholic forum?
1. Are you sure members of the Church hierarchy are worse than anyone else?
Yes. Money hoarding Nazi sympathizers that encourage the spread of AIDS in Africa are pretty dastardly. Not to mention holding the poor hostage.
2. Are you sure your faith life would be better outside of the Church?
Living without the empty threat of eternal damnation and the corruption of the church. Yup.
3. Are you sure the Church’s teachings are wrong?
Yeah, the Bible is 98% political diatribe and lies made up to control simple-minded barbarians.
4. Are you sure the Church’s doctrines aren’t divinely inspired?
Doesn’t matter. If the church’s doctrines are divinely inspired, I’d rather burn in hell than kowtow to such a shallow and egotistical scumbag like Yah’weh.
5. Are you sure we don’t need the Church?
Light houses are of more use than the church
oh, Patt. FYI, this world has always been pagan. Nothing changes; the number of religions that could be found on a continenant back in the 1000s was astonishing. I’m not casting god aside; for me to do that, I would have to find evidence/proof he’s real. Heartfelt stories and personal opinions do not amount to the same level of confirmation as the scientific method. If you’re curious, I was raised Protestant but I have seen the folly in my ways. While you sit there making half-witted insults about someone else’s variation of the same religion you believe in, I’m sitting here at peace with myself. Religion has always separated man, you’re proof of it.
Thank you for responding to me. I do see your point about the Holy Spirit not controlling humans or preventing their evil deeds even in Jesus’ time. But unfortunately you are also correct that my doubts cannot be resolved that quickly; I wish they were. Although I believe that Christ appointed Peter to head his church, I don’t have equal faith in the succession of popes thereafter. I know this is probably not going to go over well here, but I often disagree with the actions of Pope Benedict and the current Bishops, when I know I’m supposed to be in lockstep with them. Although the Marian doctrines are beautiful, it bothers me a lot that to know that there is such weak Biblical evidence for the degree to which she is venerated. I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of praying to dead people (e.g. saints), even though I know it’s supposed to be like asking a friend or family member on earth to pray for you. I just don’t understand why we should pray to Mary or dead people in the form of saints instead of going to Jesus or God directly. I don’t really believe that there needs to be an intermediary and I’m frankly not sure it helps to go through a middle man. I’ve looked up the apologetics behind this and don’t find it very convincing.
I don’t understand why the church won’t allow married priests when they did in previous centuries. I don’t understand why the current church leadership is focusing on the freaking Girl Scouts of all things when there are so many poor and hungry in the world. Although I think the church is correct in its teachings on contraception and abortion, I don’t understand at all why these issues are taking so much precedence over all other moral teachings of the church. I have seen others here say that’s because you have to have the right to life first and foremost, but I just don’t agree that it should be to the exclusion of all other issues.
I often feel very alone when I read this site and Catholic Answers, like maybe I’m not supposed to call myself Catholic after all. I just can’t imagine that Jesus would be calling for an investigation into the Girl Scouts or that he would be judging who wore inappropriately short shorts to mass. What I see in the current Catholic church, especially among the more devout Catholics, seems so far away from what I think Jesus would have actually done, and when I investigate that authority being claimed for these not-Biblical actions the validity of the authority looks pretty weak. It’s unwelcoming and it makes me want no part of calling myself Catholic, to be honest.
Incorrect—Christ appointed Peter as head and there have been a succession of popes since then. You are on the wrong track, your info is wrong. But, not surprising coming form a Protestant. Have you started your own church yet?
Patt,
In the first few centuries there were 3 main centers for Christianity. Antioch, Rome and Jerusalem. Even the church at Rome in the early centuries was governed by a plurality of elders. According to Catholic sources, there were no bishops in Rome prior to the second century (and Peter died in the first century):
“We must conclude that the New Testament provides no basis for the notion that before the apostles died, they ordained one man for each of the churches they founded…“Was there a Bishop of Rome in the First Century?”...the available evidence indicates that the church in Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than by a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 80,221-222).” Sullivan is a rc himself.
Alvin, the Pope is not the supreme leader like the unseen villain in Rocky & Bullwinkle. He is the Vicar of Christ; the successor to St. Peter, the Bishop of Rome. There was only one Rock. Peter and his successors, at their best, don’t think of themselves as the supreme leader. They think of themselves as servants of the servants of Christ. The Pope has often let cardinals and bishops deliver decisions of the church. Vatican II’s documents were not all written and delivered by Pope John or Pope Paul. As for what RC has ever rebuked the Pope - read half the threads in this post.
Alvin, you need to go back to history class. Your info is so incorrect. Protestant churches start splitting from the Roman Catholic Church, in the 1500’s—numbering now at over 25,000. The Bible was provided by the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestants changed that and watered it down and to their liking (dumped 7 books, and rewrote some of it). Please examine a solid history book and check it out for yourself. If you ever read the Church Fathers—they too were Roman Catholics, as were all the Apostles. The Catholic Church was founded by the Son of God—that was the ONLY church until the split). Please check your FACTS first.
Alvin, the Church was here before the Bible as we know it was put together. The very earliest Christians did not have a complete Bible to go to- only the Hebrew scriptures and some of Paul’s letters as they got written and passed around. It is the Catholic Church that put together the very Bible that you believe is the ONLY source of divine revelation.
Dear Alvin,
Beyond scripture we have Tradition which precedes the written gospels.However the concept of Purgatory is found as well in Maccabees & being a typical Catholic, I’m not able to give your chapter & verse by memory, but it should be easy to find if you google it, or if you’re Catholic you can find that in the Old Testament.If not, you may have to borrow a Catholic bible.
“Sola scriptura” itself is not biblical if you think about it.
And celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine.
God bless!
AlexanderOfAlex,
RC doctrines that are not grounded in Scripture are:
1) The papacy
2) indulgences
3) Marian dogmas
4) celibate leadership
5) Purgatory
Michael W,
Lets start with Scripture in making the case if Peter was the supreme leader of the church. He was one of the leaders of the church but was never thought of as being the supreme leader of the church. Take for example the first council of the church in Acts 15. It was James and not Peter who gave the final decision. See Acts 15:19. Peter never refers to himself as the supreme leader but a “fellow elder” in I Peter 5:1. Paul rebukes Peter in Galatians. (What RC has ever rebuked a pope?)
It is true that Christ used Peter at Pentecost to be the first to preach the gospel after He ascended. However, this does not make him the supreme leader of the church. The NT church is not structured on the premise of a supreme human leader as head of the church. That idea took centuries to develop.
Hello, One Foot Out.
I don’t think I will be able to persuade you in a couple of lines, but just a couple of things to think about.
The Bible is chock-full of examples of persons who were personally unfaithful, but that God nevertheless used as instruments of his message. Even the great king David was guilty of adultery and murder, yet God permitted him to be the ancester of our Lord. And David is cited as a model of vitrue.
We could ask a similar question of Jesus: why did he allow Judas Iscariot to betray him? Or, for that matter, the chief priests and scribes to have him crucified?
It seems from the Bible that the Holy Spirit is not interested in controlling people’s behavior, even their bad behavior.
I would be curious to know which doctrines you find are not in consonance with the Scriptures.
God bless you!
I am one of these Catholics who has been on the verge of leaving the Church for the past year at least, and I can say that these questions don’t really address why I’m considering leaving. The real reason I’m considering leaving is because I DON’T believe that “sacred tradition” is equal in authority to the Bible. The pedophilia scandal has actually brought that into glaring relief for me, too. The counter-argument usually used in that regard is that priests are only human and can therefore fail. But often the same people make arguments that ‘sacred tradition’ is divinely inspired and that the Holy Spirit will protect that church from serious doctrinal error. If that were really true, why can’t the Holy Spirit protect the church from so many pedophile priests? Why should I believe that the Holy Spirit is so selective in when it chooses to help the church? There are so many Catholic doctrines that simply make no sense and because they aren’t in the Bible, you have to place just as much faith or more in traditions created by fallible humans and believe that somehow they wouldn’t steer the Church wrong, when the evidence appears to support the contrary.
Peter is universally acknowledged as the head of the Church by Christ himself, the New Testament Authors, and the Church Universal until the Protestant Revolt. It was Simon, inspired by the Father himself, whom Jesus renamed Rock at Caesarea Philippi. St. John, the beloved disciple, deferred to Cephas as the first Apostle to enter the tomb. St. Paul, after his conversion, seeks Peter’s authority to bring gentiles into the Church. Peter alone atones for his cowardice to Jesus who says feed my sheep/lambs. Peter, along with James and John alone, is privileged by Christ to experience the Transfiguration and the Agony in the Garden. It is Peter who speaks to the observant Jews from around the world after the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Don’t be mislead; check your own Bible; the head of the Apostles, the Rock upon whom the Church is built, is the “sinful man” who denied Him 3 times, who got angry at the Lord, doubted him on the Sea and was ultimately bound and taken away against his will. St. Peter pray for us and Christ’s Holy Church on Earth. Maranatha.
Dear Alvin,
I’m guessing you are not a Catholic?
Kathleen,
If you read where the structure of the church is mentioned (Eph 2:20-21, 4:11; I Timothy 3) you will not find any mention of Peter being the head of the church nor of any papacy. These things do not exist in the NT church.
Steve, first it’s not “blessing off” it’s consecrating. God, thru the priest, changes the host and the wine to His Body and Blood when the priest repeats the words of Christ from Scripture: “This is my body-This is my blood.” It is not my job to convince you, only to let you know. This is something that the very earliest Christians believed. I do not deny that other religions speak of an “afterlife”. What I said was that they do not make the same “audacious” claims that the Catholic Church makes. Like Jesus, who you have to take as either a liar and a charlatan, or that he was speaking the Truth, you either believe that the Church is full of lying hucksters, or that it tells the Truth of Christ.
Posted by Alvin on Tuesday, Jun 5, 2012 5:13 PM (EST):“Marcy,
The power to bind and loose was also given to the other apostles. See Matt 18:18. Peter was not the only one that had this authority. Secondly, you won’t find any of the other apostles acknowledging that Peter alone is the supreme leader of the church. Not even Peter saw himself like this.”
***********
Alvin,
The important thing is that Christ himself made Peter head of the Church.
joanp: Firstly, if you read my initial post carefully, I didn’t even call on anybody to present me an instance of a host literally turning into body and blood. Let me put it another way: how can we tell a wafer that’s been blessed off by a priest from a plain old circular piece of bread if two were put in front of us, and we didn’t see the blessing occur? Second, there were a lot of hucksters in the dark ages making their money by displaying phony relics. How do you know this isn’t a fake relic that somehow got taken into circulation (no pun intended) by the church, and was granted official sanction?
To your second point, here are a few religions with afterlife claims to get you started: Islam, greek mythology and egyptian myth.
Marcy,
The power to bind and loose was also given to the other apostles. See Matt 18:18. Peter was not the only one that had this authority. Secondly, you won’t find any of the other apostles acknowledging that Peter alone is the supreme leader of the church. Not even Peter saw himself like this.
Tom & Kathy Baird,
The teachings of the RCC are not inspired-inerrant. Only the Scriptures are.
WWMD: What Would Mary Do?
I once heard a priest say to the question,” Will there ever be married priest? The answer is NEVER! That being said, Will I ever be able to be a mother? NEVER! God intended specific purposes for each gender, he made us equal for we are made in His image, But He also made us different. Women can bear children; men cannot. But it takes both a man and a woman to create the life of that child God planned. Because I can’t be a mother, do you see me out protesting in front of the church with a sign saying “God is unfair! Men can’t be mothers!” No I accept God’s will and purpose for me. As for married priest, Yes there was a time when priest could marry and they still do in the Eastern Rite and Orthodox church, but they must marry before they can be ordained and no married priest can be ordained a bishop. So the question of could priest marry can be answered, Yes, if the Roman rite changes they could marry BEFORE ordination.”
He also said that celibacy is a gift from God. It is a gift that strengthens the man to minister to God’s people.“All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it. ” Matthew 19:12
The church is not a divine democracy as many think. We don’t decide on what WE think it should be! I hear so many people say “I think God just wants this or that.” People often pray for God’s will in their lives, but do any truly have the mind of God? Not really. The Holy Spirit does guide the Pope in matters of faith and morals so that when he officially speaks on these matters ,ie women priest, he speaks the will of God.
Jesus told Peter, our first pope, ” “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Matthew 16:18-19
This authority to bind and loosen has been past down to each pope since the day Our Savior commissioned Peter to be the head of His church here on earth.
There have been times when I too felt like leaving the Catholic Church, but I, like Peter said, ” Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.” John 6:68 And only the Catholic Church has the Bread of Life, the source, summit and center of our existence the Holy Eucharist.
I hope and pray that the scales will fall off the eyes of Anna Quindlen, and that the Holy Spirit will break her heart of stone and make it for God alone!
It is not about what we believe. Yes the teaching of the Church and the Bible are inspired, but something needs to be done with Priest who can’t preach or will not preach from the Bible. We left a Catholic Church and went to another because the Priest did not like John Paul ll, and even more so hated preaching from the Bible. We have had many Priest run off and get married. What do we do? The Priest will not return calls at night or pick up the phone after office hours. Phone machines are on all the time. A Priest is no where to be had. Bishops bring back Priest who have gotten girls in trouble. People are tired of all this. Who wants to go to confession to a Priest who is in Mortal Sin. It is discouraging and depressing. It breaks my heart and spirit because of all this.
d
Well said. Thank you!
The abuse of children in the catholic church is 2%. This is the same as for married men! The abuse of children by teachers and staff is 5%. The largest abuse of children is by their own parents or caregiver nearly 80%.So if the media is condemning the church so unrelentlessly and sometimes in error, should it not be looking at other child abusers more so!
The use of contraceptives acts as an abortion agent in some cases.All contraception has done is cause promiscuity, abortion, divorce,corruption of the youth,and pornography which is destroying marriages.
Our Lady of Fatima in 1917 asked for the Rosary to be said every day as it defeats hell. Why are Catholics not doing what she is asking? Our Lady knows what is ahead of us and gives us the means of her spiritual weapon! Our lady also said woe to women lacking in modesty and the children were shown hell! Also 70,000 people witnessed the miracle which she had promised. Catholics, return to your faith,follow the truth. God bless, Jacinta.
Well said Carol Lee—and I add an AMEN to yours. Some people love to get on here and squabble, guess they have nothing else going on in their life. Yet here they are inflicting their errors.
After all is said and done, for me it comes down to some very simple uncomplicated answers as to why I stay in the catholic faith. This church was founded by Jesus Christ. No other church was. I firmly believe in the power of the Holy Spirit and have no doubt the Bible was written by men, under the guidance of same. God does not play with us and would not send us a book with mistakes. the bones of Jesus are in heaven with Him. All the bones of other founders can be found here. All this squabbling over Nuns/Women becoming Priests can be dealt with once they learn obedience to God. Folks leaving the Church because of….you name it…..did not have their eye on Jesus. They had it on the problem. Jesus is all about forgiveness. So that is my 2 cents for what it’s worth. Have a blessed life and my favorite saying goes like this. It matters not the problem, the answer is always JESUS!! Amen ! +++
Differences of opinion within any organization - secular or religious can be creative and helpful. There is hardly a major figure in Catholic history, Thomas Aquinas is a good example, that lacked opponents inside the faith. Sadly, there comes a time when disagreement becomes destructive. If someone genuinely disagrees with the Church on core theological or social issues such as Christ’s full divinity within the Trinity or the Church’s opposition to abortion, it may be better for both the individual and the Church if they leave. If they do, let us all pray that those leaving stay within the broader Christian fold and not fall into aimless secularism.
The Church is in for some tough times ahead throughout the industrial world including the United States. We may very well be better off if nominal Catholics left and allowed the Church to live and preach a unified and holy message. In the long run, dedication to the faith is the basis for renewal.
Eric Bergerud
Steve B., with regard to your #2 statement/question: There have been verifiable Eucharistic Miracles in which the white consecrated host turned into human flesh, specifically heart muscle with blood type AB. You can do a search on this, there are many of these miracles that have been preserved and can still be seen today. With regard to your #4, I am not aware of any of these other religions offering an eternal life with a God Who claims to be the Creator of all things. None of these other religions make the “audacious” claims that the Catholic/Christian religion makes so I would not expect to find Vishnu, Buddha or any other ‘deity’ at the Pearly Gates.
“Lord, to whom shall we go ? You have the words of eternal life”.These are the words of someone who doesn’t really understand everything either , but St. Peter was willing to trust and just believe in the Lord. Poor Ms Quindlen isn’t the first to leave because she disagrees with the Church. Like you i feel that if she would only dig deeper ,really understand the whys and wherefores, she would stay and stay gladly. Many do not want to follow the Church , they want the Church to follow them and conform with their own desires.
Ms. Quindlen is leaving officially, desenting on so many core issues and criticizing so publicly, she had ceased to be Catholic in her heart. It is obvious to all that she is not Catholic, and so her announcement was just making it formal. She can always return, one can hope and pray, remember the prodigal son.
Jennifer,
Your questions don’t seem directed toward me, as I didn’t leave the church seeking some greater pathway toward God. I question whether God exists, and the evidence I see points toward “no.” Namely, I don’t see any sort of divine influence meddling in our lives and I don’t see a divine hand in nature. Nature in my view is consistent with having been built up by a gradual natural process. Until you, as a believer, or anyone else who believes, shows me evidence otherwise, I am inclined to doubt the supernatural.
I’ll answer your questions nonetheless:
1. I’ll answer this question in the dramaticaaly opposite, and go as far as to say that the church (and Christian churches of all stripes) do in fact do some good in the world. I’ve also heard it said that Hamas and Hezbollah provide social services (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas#Social_welfare). If you want me to accept Christianity warts and all, for the good it provides, you have to ask me if I think we should accept Hamas for the good it does, if you want to be intellectually honest. My answer, in case you were wondering, is I think we can get social welfare done without the religious nonsense.
2. Any religion will claim that its sacraments are the most holy and powerful. Again, it’s incumbent upon you who believe to demonstrate objectively the power of your rituals. How do you measure the presence of Jesus’s spirit in a communion wafer? It may be handy to clarify the difference between subjective and objective data: subjective data what someone perceives but can’t be independently verified. As a nursing student, my patient can tell me he’s in sharp pain in his left knee. I can’t definitively verify my patient’s pain level because I can’t feel what he’s feeling. Objective data can be measured and verified. I can tell that the patient from my previous example has an injury because I can do a range-of-motion test and find I can’t bend the leg at the knee without feeling major resistance, and any other nurse on the floor can confirm (or falsify) my finding. I’ll read every book from every apologist you want, but it’s all subjective data. Plus there are apologists for other religions that will make claims about their rituals.
3. The church’s good teachings like love your neighbor are hardly unique to the Christian church, as anyone who has studied other religions can tell you (and it’s starting to dawn on me that perhaps you, Jennifer, have not considered any other religion than the Catholic church). All that aside, how does the church (Catholic or otherwise) decide which of the Bible’s teaching are “right” and which are “wrong?”
4. This question I think ties in with the previous one. Again, it’s incumbent upon you as believers to demonstrate that your church’s teachings are divinely inspired. There is so much wrong what you put out above it’s hard to know where to begin. Again every church will claim its teachings have divine inspiration, and there are religions older than Christianity. And yet you, Jennifer, gravitated toward Catholicism. Why not place your wager, if you will, on Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Confucianism, Celtic mythology, or anything else? What if, when you pass on, it’s Cu Chulainn or Vishnu or Tiamat waiting for you at the pearly gates?
5. I think I addressed this well enough in the first question, and add that, with so-called moderate religion it’s just as likely that these moderates have stopped taking everything in the Bible literally because of the hammer blows of secular society, until someone who believes can demonstrate objectively that commandments came down from divine inspiration.
“Quindlen did this to make a grand statement.”
padraig (12:39 PM)
If so, she has a poor sense of timing and an even poorer sense of the grand.
A “grand statement” for womankind would have been leaving the Democrat Party when Ted “Chappaquiddick” Kennedy was taken seriously by that party as a potential nominee as its candidate for president. Or when any of Bill Clinton’s many sexual peccadillos came to light (starting with the revelations of Gennifer Flowers in 1992).
A “grand statement” against the Church due to the scandal over homosexual pederasty would have best been made, oh at least over a decade ago - better still in the 1990s or yet better in the 1980s when a few cases made national news. In the 1980s, a “grand statement” by a New York Times columnist, as Quindlen was at the time, may well have done a lot of good and spared many innocents much subsequent grief.
No, Padraig, Quindlen made no “grand statement.” Because it was so anticlimactically late in coming, her statement was not even so grand as a yawn.
“I am tired of every homily or article being about contraception or abortion or leaving the church.”
Oh please reveal the name and location of your parish where “every homily” is such a homily!
”[T]he Lord… had no cardinals or bishops to worry about.”
Ha ha ha. Perhaps you never heard that the bishops are the successors of the Lord’s apostles? Or of all the trouble the Lord had with those apostles, especially Simon Peter whom He made his vicar on earth (not just a mere cardinal)?
Try again.
Let us first define “The church”/ For me it is not just the hierarchy but the people of God and this includes many who may not have even heard of the Roman Catholic Church.
1 The leaders of the RCC may not be WORSE than anyone else but since the heirarchy are supposedly chosen from among the best of the clergy, they should be better. (Or does no one ask for divine assistance in choosing those to be promoted! Certainly if the sacraments prayers and rituals (to say nothing of rules and regulations) are taken seriously they should ALL be better. And if they aren’t…...?
2 If I have to give all my trust to the church rather than to God and stop using my God-given gift of reasoning to stay in the institution, yes I believe my faith is better outside. It is authentic and being True to Oneself is vitally important.
3 The church has indeed made many mistakes over the centuries so I must look at each teaching for myself.
4 Divinely inspired? God speaks to anyone who is willing to really listen. And what we hear is what we really need to hear. It is often challenging, sometimes not what we hoped to hear, but always there is Love.
5 I think we do need others who are truly seeking the God of Being, Love and Truth, so that we are challenged to question our beliefs and actions. It is only after questioning that one can truly believe - otherwise one is just accepting another’s belief - (believing in them rather than in God.)
It is not true that the Roman Catholic church cannot err in matters of faith and morals. We already see an error at 841. “The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”
Jennifer. Thanks for this article / post. Coming from a convert they are so pwerful and reinforce my life long faith and beliefs. God has been generous and loving enough to give us what we need to obtain eternal salvation and that is His Church and it’s infalibility in matters of faith and morals to guide us in these most trying of all times. Keep up the good work you are doing. I plan to keep up with your posts knowing I will hear more “good stuff” from you in the days ahead. God Bless you!!
Thank you for clarifying. I believe I misunderstood your earlier post.
Okay so I know I said I was done with this thread, but I’ve just got to clarify. The dynamic of the “few” and the “many” in reference to Heaven and Hell comes straight from the lips of Christ himself as recorded in the Gospels. Go down to your local Barnes and Noble, buy a copy of the New Testament, and read it. “Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ,” wrote St. Jerome. It’s Christ’s teaching on the subject, not mine. If you don’t like it, take it up which Him in prayer. You might be surprised to find out that he doesn’t want you to go there. In teaching about the reality of Heaven and Hell, the Church is fulfilling her obligation to spread the Gospel…all of the Gospel…not just the warm and fuzzy bits.
Claire is absolutely right. God desires that no one should go to hell. But there are those whose rejection of Him in this life is so complete that they simply do not want God at all in the next. They hear the Truth, but do not recognize it. The may recognize it, but refuse to accept it. They may accept it, but refuse to live their lives accordingly. Think of hell as a complete, total, irreversible form of self-absorption. It does not come about by accident or as a result of one little “slip-up,” but rather as the end result of a string of choices that were freely entered into at every step along the way. God’s grace is more powerful than our choices, so as long as we draw breath there is always the possibility that His grace and mercy will penetrate our hearts. But even God will not force us to love him, and for that reason there will be people who, for whatever reason, will choose not to do so. Love can never be forced. If it is, then it isn’t love.
It’s okay to find the doctrine of Hell disturbing, because it is. The idea that the choices we make in this life carry with them eternal consequences is one of the most unnerving aspects our relationship with the Almighty this side of eternity. The Good News, however, is that God is on our side. He wants everyone to know, love, and serve him in this life, and to live with him in the next. For this, he pours out unlimited grace and mercy every day of our lives, all we have to do is accept it. Think of God’s grace as like a big, giant package. A gift. You didn’t earn it, you can’t buy it, you definitely don’t deserve it, but it’s yours to have all the same. All you have to do is receive it. The thing is, though, it’s such an enormous gift that, in order to receive it, you have to be willing to put down all of your other packages.
Refusing to believe Christ’s teaching on the subject of Hell will not save you from it. Archbishop Fulton Sheen was once told by someone that she refused to believe in hell…to which the archbishop simply replied “you will when you are there, madam.”
No, it does not equate God creating people with the goal of sending them to Hell. If Upbeat Dad wants to elaborate, he can, but I will no longer speak for him or for the Church, because like I said, you disguised your agenda earlier in the thread and now it is showing itself loud and clear. If you had been honest from the start, fine, but you pretended that you wanted to better understand Church teaching on sexuality, when what you really wanted was to criticize the Church as a whole. I have no tolerance for being lied to.
So, what was Upbeat Dad saying? Those were his exact words. I think the phrase “few will go to heaven, many will go to hell” speaks for itself.
You didn’t want anything to do with it to begin with. That much is obvious. God did not create anyone with the goal of sending them to Hell. That is not what Upbeat Dad was saying. You are twisting his words.
Yes, hell is a major problem for me. I simply can’t wrap my head around how a perfectly loving God could create the majority of humanity with an eternal destination of damnation.
I disagree very strongly with Upbeat Dad’s statement “But there is an ultimate reality here in the eschaton that is harsh, insofar as we are all going to die, we are all going to be judged, few will go to heaven, many will go to hell. That…straight from the teachings of Christ himself.” If this statement accurately reflects the teachings of the Catholic Church, then I want nothing more to do with it.
God is also, all Just, and cannot go contrary to His Holy nature.
IESS: I honestly thought you came here wanting answers for the rationale behind Church teaching on sexuality. I was impressed that you were respectful in how you asked questions, and that you were respectful when you disagreed. But now I’m getting the feeling that you had a totally different agenda. Now you have moved on to criticize Church teaching (as you understand it) in other areas as well. This makes me think that you did not come here to get answers for your questions, but to find opportunities to criticize. The Church does not teach that God is waiting for us to make one false move so he can send us to hell. That is not what Catholicism is all about. God is merciful. We send ourselves to hell if we reject his mercy.
IESS
You do not like the idea of Hell? You find it “deeply disturbing”? Well, Christ, the Son of God, who came down from Heaven—speaks of Hell 17 times in the New Testament. So don’t take our word for it—pay attention to His warnings. He does not want anyone to go Hell- but everyone has a free will about who they choose to serve
...
IESS - You bring up all the old, tired canards about the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, like many liberals and anti-Catholics that cherry-pick from Western European history. Galileo got in trouble for theological reasons, not his scientific views, and the Pope apologized long ago for any perceived persecution. The Catholic Church supported science for centuries through the university system it started, and St. Thomas Aquinas did the best job reconciling faith with reason hundreds of years ago.
.
Read Michael Coren’s book, ‘Why Catholics Are Right’ to get the debunked story of our history. Coren is a British convert who is part Jewish, and lives now in Canada. Excellent book.
Galileo proved that the Earth moved around the Sun and was persecuted for it. “And yet it moves.” Eventually the Church had to change its theological view of the cosmos in response to Galileo’s discoveries.
Truth cannot contradict truth. Truth taught by the Church cannot contradict truth taught by science. Church teaching on matters that are not purely divine revelation should have an independent basis. (And the teaching on contraception is based on the Church’s understanding of the Natural Law, not on divine revelation.) “Because we said so” simply isn’t good enough. Otherwise, we might as well join the creation scientists in believing that dinosaurs are extinct because they were too big to fit on the Ark.
Furthermore, I find it deeply disturbing that an element of your faith is that many people go to hell. Do you really believe that God works this way? If so, I feel sorry for you. Living your life in fear that one slip up will lead to eternal fire. That your friends and neighbors will spend eternity in torment. If this is what Catholicism is all about, then I certainly do not agree with it.
“Believe it, don’t believe it, it’s entirely up to you, but do not delude yourself into thinking that the Truth of such teaching is somehow contingent upon your assent, because it isn’t, any more than the truth of the Earth’s orbit around the Sun is somehow contingent upon your agreement.”
Nor is the Earth’s orbit around the Sun contingent on Church approval. Or have we all forgotten what happened to Galileo?
Very thought-provoking post, per usual, Jennifer! Thank you for this. Like many others here, I thought that Anna Quindlen had already left the Church many years ago, seeing that she drank fully from the well of modernist and liberal ideas—ideas that I myself used to harbour during my pre-revert days of being lost and wandering aimlessly in the faithless wilderness (thanks to poor to absent catechesis in my youth through the Sixties and Seventies).
.
But after so many decades of drifting far, far away from God and my faith, I’ve finally come home, unlike the turn taken by Ms. Quindlen. Now that I have begun to really learn and understand the TRUE teachings of my faith, I can only scratch my head helplessly at those who have chosen to leave —when it seems clear to me that these people never really learned the genuine teachings of the Church at all, having perhaps been “catechised” in the wholly false but heavily media-promoted version of the “Catholic faith” put forth with vigour by the liberal and secular media mavens who so dominate our public forums today. One can only pray that Ms. Quindlen may be blessed once more by the Holy Spirit so as to see her Catholicism in its TRUE light! If one is careless, one can easily mistake these noisier and dominant opinions for “truths about the Catholic Church today”. Only when I went beyond these popular and fake stereotypes to the actual sources did I realise how beautiful and majestic truly are its teachings!
.
The irony I find is that, contrary to the ultra-feminist and liberal claims that the Church oppresses women, etc., the truth of the matter is that an understanding of its thoughts on sex, human relationships, contraception and abortion (as outlined in Pope Paul VI’s ‘Humanae Vitae’ and Blessed John Paul II’s ‘The Theology of the Body’, as well as the ‘Catechism of the Catholic Church’, among others), actually recognises the basic dignity of every human life, from the unborn to the disabled and the aged. It clarifies to me so well the basis for its teachings on such matters, and unless one accepts that fundamental tenet, nothing would make sense.
.
One more thing: I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the comments and responses of Upbeat Dad here, and I think he should start his own blog or website, or contribute to similar as a Catholic apologist! Upbeat Dad, you put forward such lucid explanations and defenses of the faith with generous doses of charity and compassion. Excellent work! Bravo, good sir!
OMG, I am stunned at this moment. Without hesitation, via my informed conscience I just answered affirmatively to all five. This is an answer to prayer. I thank you for the peace, faith, future community, ministry and eternity I will experience as a result of this revelation.
@ IESS and Molly:
Molly is right, IESS, and I hardly think a person of your obvious intelligence needs to be told what the potential dangers and harms might be, but, as Molly points out there are numerous sources on the subject. TOB, Humana Vitae, Evangelium Vitae, the Bible, the Catechism, etc. etc.
There’s a troubling phenomenon developing in the Church today, with people trying to mask their open dissent with claims that the Church’s teachings are somehow ambiguous, or unclear. The most famous (now infamous) example that comes to mind is Nancy Pelosi’s claim in a nationally televised interview back in 2008 that the Church’s teaching on abortion was relatively new (within the last 50 years) and ambiguous at best. Utterly ridiculous, of course, but that seems to be a strategy used by people who are in open dissent of Church teaching but do not want to follow through on the implications of that dissent by leaving the Church.
Holy Mother Church teaches what she teaches, and does so infallibly. Believe it, don’t believe it, it’s entirely up to you, but do not delude yourself into thinking that the Truth of such teaching is somehow contingent upon your assent, because it isn’t, any more than the truth of the Earth’s orbit around the Sun is somehow contingent upon your agreement. In addition, do not further delude yourself into thinking that your open dissent is justified by perceived ambiguities in Church teaching where none exist. Your dissent is just that, YOUR DISSENT, it is not the by-product of any failures in the Church’s cathechesis whether real or imagined.
It is good to ask thoughtful questions, as these help us grow in our understanding of the faith. But it is not good to keep on asking questions after several reputable Church sources have given an answer. The answers are what they are and they are not going to change simply by continuing to question. Sooner or later, all the questioning has to cease, and decision has to be made. “Do I believe this, or not?” If you buy it, you’re Catholic. If you don’t you’re not. The Catholic Church: Believe It, Or Leave It. If that seems harsh, that’s not my intention. But there is an ultimate reality here in the eschaton that is harsh, insofar as we are all going to die, we are all going to be judged, few will go to heaven, many will go to hell. That…straight from the teachings of Christ himself.
And with that, I’m done with this thread. God Bless…
And it’s far from being the only document touching on the subject. Try Humanae Vitae.
IESS:
And so I’m starting to think you’re not THAT familiar with TOB. What JPII (and the Church) believe to be the harms (I say that because I realize you still may not believe that they are in fact harmful) are clearly stated within TOB. TOB, and the commentaries even, is not easy to read. But if the effort is put in to do so you can definitely find what you state above you are looking for. So I realize you say you’re familiar with TOB, but I guess my question is how wide is your interpretation of “familiar”? You’ve read a few excerpts so you feel you’ve got the whole idea? Maybe you’ve read some commentary by someone who is not an officially approved commentator of TOB (because the commentators officially speaking and writing are pretty clear, right away, what TOB states these “harms” to be). I guess it’s possible that you’ve read the whole thing and all the commentaries and still didn’t see what you’re looking for. I would think in that case though you would be saying, “I see what they’re saying, I just don’t agree” and not “The Church needs to be articulate about the harms of such behavior”, because it is.
“Well, the problem is that such acts by themselves are not as benign as we might like to think. It’s not just about the pleasure, or even the unitive. Usually such acts lead to other things, and even when they don’t’ there are still psycho-social effects and other consequences that are unforeseeable and entirely beyond one’s control.”
Such as…
If such activities are not benign, then what, exactly, are the harms? The argument from physical design alone is weak, especially when considering the design of the female anatomy. The Church needs to be able to articulate the harms from such behavior. Unless they can show the harms of such behavior (or the benefits of refraining from it) the teaching is, IMHO, unjustified.
@ Claire: Yes, that’s what I meant.
@ IESS: I understand your point about people’s experience. The problem though, is the experience, by itself, is not the sole and exclusive arbiter of objective Truth. (I capitalize the word there, in reference to Jesus, because for Catholics truth is not someTHING, but rather someONE).
Consider the following example, for thousands of years people though the Sun revolved around the earth. Far from being an idiotic belief of primitive people, this was actually a very well reasoned and logical understanding based principally upon experience. One could stand outside and observe the Sun’s movement across the sky, and it appeared (and still does today) that the Sun is the object moving, not the Earth. That is a very logical, very reasonable, very understandable, very experientially-based conclusion to make, and it’s also very, very wrong. The point is that experience sometimes matches up with reality, but quite often it doesn’t.
So it is with human sexual expression. I’ll grant you that many people’s experience (both gay and straight) is such that certain sexual, but non-penetrative, acts are pleasurable and, as I said in my previous comment, capable of fostering the unitive aspect. So what’s the big deal? I mean, after all, it’s not as if anyone is being hurt right? They are consenting adults, they aren’t doing it in public possibly giving scandal to others or violating the innocence of children. There’s no procreation occurring, so it’s not as if an abortion could be in the offing. What’s the problem?
Well, the problem is that such acts by themselves are not as benign as we might like to think. It’s not just about the pleasure, or even the unitive. Usually such acts lead to other things, and even when they don’t’ there are still psycho-social effects and other consequences that are unforeseeable and entirely beyond one’s control. This is all part of the mystery of sex. Part of the reason God, through his Church (and it is His Church, by the way, not ours) restricts sexual expression to marriage is because of it’s enormous physical, emotional, and psychological power. Simply having a “committed” relationship is not enough to withstand those powerful forces. In marriage, God grants us palpable, sanctifying grace to handle whatever comes our way as a result of sexual congress, be it children or intense feelings of attachment or whatever the case may be.
So experience is a factor, but it’s not the only factor. And the Church must teach according to God’s design, not according to human experience or desire.
God bless….
Denise—EXCELLENT! Totally agree as a wife and mother. Such discontent in people…
For all who are commenting about how they don’t know why Jesus only chose men and not woment to be priests, who think or feel that women are considered second class citizens…remember the ten commandments (whichever version you follow…Jewish, Catholic or Protestant)...we were given a commandment (remember those?) long before God sent His only Son to us here on earth…a commandment to not covet. Period. We are not to covet someone’s spouse or someone’s possessions (job and vocation can fall under that as well). I am baffled how some people want to believe that Jesus only called men to do something for Him and not women. Really??? You honestly think He did NOT know what He was doing? That He was merely following the ways/culture of the time when He walked here on earth??? Really??? He did not leave women without a vocation to follow…he has asked us to be wives, mothers, sisters, daughters…and to do what all those duties require of us completely and sacrificially. And remember all are called to be sinless (wish people were more jealous of those leading a sinless life than of what we are supposedly missing out by not being a priest!) Honestly how much better would our world be for us and for our children if we put the same energy into who we are and what God is really calling us to be (His Holy children) instead of what someone else is doing?
Jacknife’s post is reflective of the attitude of legions of people. It is very SAD. People flippantly tossing away their eternity with the Creator. Christ came into a pagan world and now it has gone back to paganism. He said that “few” will be saved. May God have mercy on us all.
IESS: I was trying to use the cremation/scattering ashes analogy to illustrate what I meant about the intercourse/hysterectomy issue. It’s about respect and intent. It’s not the woman’s fault that she can’t conceive, but she is still respecting the nature of the act. Using a condom on the day of ovulation is trying to block the procreative function of the act. Avoiding intercourse during the fertile period of a woman’s cycle and engaging in intercourse during the infertile period is still not rendering the act itself infertile. Therefore it is also different than using a condom on the day of ovulation, which renders the act itself infertile.
I don’t think Upbeat Dad meant that non-procreative sexual acts can’t be unitive. I think what he was saying is that the Church teaches that it’s not ethical to separate the two (unitive and procreative).
“While sexual acts outside of marital intercourse could conceivably foster the unitive, they could not possibly foster the procreative, and the consistent teaching of the Church, the consistent witness of Scripture, and the consistent witness of Tradition hold that God’s purpose includes both. “
This is specifically where I disagree: That sexuality MUST maintain its procreative aspect to be unitive and, therefore, to be moral. The teaching simply doesn’t match the experiences of many people.
Thank you for your response.
yea, I’m sorry if your take on roman paganism+altered judaism isn’t appealing to me. I’d rather not live my life in fear of a dogma thats outdated and corrupted. If god is real and I am going to hell, so be it. If god can sentence me to a place where my only reason to be convicted is because I refused to believe a book thats supposedly “divine word” and churches who have fabricated enough history about God and the church to cover the entire earth, then fine. I guess that shows how happy I made god then. No, I am not catholic bashing, I am pointing out how all christian churches have went completely against the “rules”.
Jennifer, I do a LOT of reading on the internet (mainly Catholic srticles) and I must say, this post of yours is one of the best I’ve read. Clearly, you have been inspired; I have the nothing but admiration for your clarity of thought - something which I regularly pray for. Praise be to God for His loving guidance and God bless you!
@IsEverySpermSacred: O.K. Now I remember reading those objections upthread, its just that this thread has gotten so long as to be unwieldy…
Where to start? Well, it seems to me that the principal stumbling block for you here has to do with understanding God’s plan and purpose for human sexuality, as revealed in Scripture and Tradition and as promulgated by the Magisterium. I’ll grant you that there are many sexual acts (outside of marital intercourse) that can indeed be pleasurable to both partners (and we can just as well include gay and lesbian couples here too). Part of the problem for all of us is that, while the Magisterium does teach infallibly on such matters, individual Catholics still have to come to an understanding of those teachings in the context of the culture in which they live and they are not immune to the controlling assumptions the culture imposes. The controlling assumption that the culture imposes today is that human sexual expression is, first and foremost, about pleasure, with things like procreation being secondary.
What the Church is trying to get us all to see, however, is that God’s plan and purpose for sex goes beyond pleasure. Pleasure in ingredient in sex (thank God, for I don’t think people would do it if it weren’t) but pleasure is not the purpose. God’s purpose for human sexuality, as you have no doubt already read, is principally about drawing husband and wife together (the unitive) AND fostering children (the procreative)...both…together..not either/or. While sexual acts outside of marital intercourse could conceivably foster the unitive, they could not possibly foster the procreative, and the consistent teaching of the Church, the consistent witness of Scripture, and the consistent witness of Tradition hold that God’s purpose includes both. Another way of saying it is that the culture says sex is for pleasure, and that fostering better relations with your partner or having children are secondary matters, but our Faith says that sex is for fostering better relations AND children, and for this purpose God has graciously designed our bodies in such a way as to derive pleasure in the process. In other words, the culture reverses things on us. The culture’s influence is pervasive and I’ll admit that this is a difficult aspect of Church teaching to come to terms with.
As for same-sex couples, the issue is more cut and dried. Again, the consistent teaching of the Church is that sexual acts, of any kind, are exclusive to marriage. Same-sex marriage is simply not possible, as Christ’s own teachings on the matter make abundantly clear. No amount of legislation to the contrary can transmute God’s design. States cannot “allow” same-sex marriage any more than they can “allow” the Earth to revolve around the Sun. It is God who does the joining, not the Church, and not the government. Just because a ceremony takes place does not mean a marriage has occurred. If this seems unfair, take it up with Christ in prayer. It’s his Church, his world, and he makes the rules. The acts mentioned above are not licit for gays or lesbians under any circumstances, precisely because there is no possibility of their ever occurring in the proper marital context.
I know you disagree with all this, and I know that by worldy standards all of this must seem unfair. But things are not always what they seem. The great struggle of faith is to be humble enough to trust that God knows what he is doing, even if we don’t always understand.
To clarify: I mean manual stimulation to orgasm, not masturbation. I am not referring to self-stimulation.
@Upbeat Dad: I already posted those upthread, but I will repeat: Mutual masturbation and oral sex outside the context of intercourse between a married couple. (Anal sex is problematic from a health perspective and would be immoral for that reason.)
As someone is sure to point out, if these activities are OK for a married couple, there is no reason why these activities would not also be OK for a committed gay or lesbian couple, and I agree. I believe that gay and lesbian people are those most hurt by the Church’s position on the matter.
I don’t entirely agree with the Church’s position on barrier contraception either, but the argument is on somewhat stronger ground because this does interfere with the marital act. Still, I see this as an aesthetic issue, not than a moral one. The other activities are NOT the marital act, but something different. Whatever deficiencies these activities have, calling them “intrinsically evil” simply does not make sense.
The Church is absolutely correct about hormonal contraception and sterilization because these harm the body.
@Claire: I don’t get how an encounter with a woman who has had a hysterectomy can be “open to life”, but an encounter using a condom on the day of ovulation isn’t. Only one of those activities can actually lead to new life.
Sperm: (I wish you would change the name that you’re posting with!) I apologize. I didn’t mean to be dismissive, and I’m sorry if anyone here has called you names. TOB doesn’t say that every sperm is sacred, and it doesn’t even say that all sexual acts aside from intercourse are immoral. The Church teaches that intimacy should be in the context of intercourse. Certain acts before or after intercourse are fine as long as the ejaculation itself occurs during intercourse. This isn’t because procreation is the goal of every sexual encounter. It’s because every encounter is supposed to be both unitive and open to life (even when life is impossible, such as when the woman has had a hysterectomy). It’s kind of like the Church’s teaching on cremation. Cremation is permitted, but the ashes have to be buried rather than scattered in different locations. This is out of respect for the resurrection. I hope that makes sense.
@IsEverySpermSacred” the answer to your ID is yes. I’m a headstrong catechist for the RCIA program at my parish and I too have issues from time to time with various doctrines of the Catholic Church. However, I have also learned that when I disagree with Church doctrine, the problem is with me, not the Church. I have prayed about my stiff-necked constitution and I believe that I am gaining patience and understanding in answer to my prayers. I teach my groups the same way, when I have a problem with Church doctrine, I know the problem is with ME, and I pray for understanding so that I may come around to agreement with that doctrine.
God Bless you for your honesty, and keep pushing forward in your faith!
@IsEverySpermSacred: “The Catholic Church believes that for any sexual activity to be moral, it must be oriented toward procreation. (Or more specifically, every orgasm must be oriented toward procreation.) But the Church cannot justify this position other than with its own bare assertions. Even if completely natural sexual intercourse is the ultimate sign of unity in marriage, this does not logically make any other sexual activity immoral.”
I suppose we run the risk of getting too graphic here, but I’ll ask anyway. And please, I am trying trying to be respectful, even if most of the time I don’t succeed. Anyway, can you point out specifically which sexual activities you think TOB is say are immoral. Don’t be too graphic, just give a general sense so I know where you are coming from in your understanding.
“If you have read TOB, you would know the answers to most of the questions you’re asking (even if you don’t agree with them).”
I guess you could put it that way. I am familiar with TOB, I understand what the teaching is, and I disagree with this particular part of it. I have given my reasons why I disagree and nobody has given a response. Instead, I have gotten mostly name calling, admonitions, and instructions to re-read what I have already said I disagree with.
The problem with TOB is that it not only sees value only in one form of sexual expression, but sees all other forms of sexual expression as essentially sacrilege. Yet is there not value in doing something nice for someone else, especially your spouse? Where is the harm in doing something you both enjoy? TOB is a palace in the swamp, and all the beautiful idealism on the surface won’t change the shaky foundation.
This conversation has gotten off on a bit of a tangent, but the bigger issue is that this is one area of teaching that I very strongly disagree with and an area of Catholic teaching that I believe is truly harming people, by bringing guilt and shame into something that should be very loving and beautiful. Yet I can’t think of another area of Catholic teaching that I disagree with, or at the very least can accept.
There is a great quote by Blessed Mother Teresa that seems appropriate regarding the current sex scandals. I’m quoting from memory so forgive me if I don’t get it exactly right. “Of the 12 apostles that Jesus hand picked one betrayed Him, one denied Him and the others ran away, what can one expect from a mere Bishop.”
During the Vietnam era one popular catch phrase was, “America: love it or leave it.” As problematic as that phrase was, might I propose the following for the Catholic Church, as we seem to be at war internally these days. How’s this, “The Catholic Church: Believe It, or Leave It.”
Who wants T-shirts?
It gladdens my heart to read this article followed by so many articulate (and accurate) responses from Catholics who can site sources to refute the erroneous statements made by the “Rick’s/Rich’s” on this blog.
@ IsEverySpermSacred “That is a bald assertion. Care to elaborate?”
No, because I am not the one making the assertion, you are. The onus, therefore, is on you to demonstrate how JPII’s TOB fails in the way that you claim.
Most of the people I know that have left the Church—did so because it did not suit their life style. They lead very unfettered lives—no morals. Those pesky Ten Commandments hindered them. However they did not cite that as the reason for leaving. Like Anne Quindlan they used any other excuse they could drag up, except the real reason. What puzzles me is why pro-abort “Catholic” politicians stay—since they ignore the Church and its teaching.
Jamie: one more thing; I totally agree with you on that whole NFP with a contraceptive mindset thing. In my view, that’s scrupulosity, and I acknowledge that there are people in the church who contribute to that attitude.
Jamie: slippery slope arguments can be perfectly valid. I commend you for acknowledging God’s sovreignity in your life. Unfortunately, many people who use birth control feel very threatened when they find out that control was an illusion (i.e. the birth control failed), and hence many abortions occur as a result of birth control failures. I have no doubt this would not be the case with you. But wanting to be in control all the time can definitely contribute to the abortion statistics. I will freely admit that church teaching on contraception was a huge hurdle for me, and I give you a lot of credit for choosing a barrier method that is not an abortifacient.
I have to agree with Kathleen. I apologize for taking so long to respond (life was calling), but catching up on the comments gives me a similar impression. If you have read TOB, you would know the answers to most of the questions you’re asking (even if you don’t agree with them).
IsEverySpermSacred,
I think you’re looking for folks to discuss sexual matters with, more than theological matters.That creeps me out a bit.
If you’re serious about understanding Catholic teachings on marriage I’d suggest talking to a priest or theologian.
@Kathleen: So how is sex during the infertile period, during pregnancy, or after menopause “open to life”? Sex can only truly be “open to life” for a few days out of every cycle for a limited time in a woman’s life.
Certainly if a couple gives up regular intercourse entirely for something else, they are losing out on something. But I don’t see the problem in occasionally doing something different if both spouses enjoy it.
Posted by IsEverySpermSacred on Friday, Jun 1, 2012 1:19 PM (EST):As for Theology of the Body, it is beautiful, but it still fails to adequately explain why any act that is not oriented toward procreation is not only deficient, but immoral.
*************
That may be because the teaching is more about being “open” to life not “oriented towards” procreation.It’s understandable though to see where the confusion lies.
In this world Catholic teaching’s countercultural.Ditto for Orthodox Jewish teaching.If you want to see folks who are seriously committed/oriented towards procreation, the Orthodox Jews have us Catholics beat.Maybe you should look at one of their websites instead.
@Upbeat Dad: “That is a bald-faced lie.”
That is a bald assertion. Care to elaborate?
@ IsEverySpermSacred: “As for Theology of the Body, it is beautiful, but it still fails to adequately explain why any act that is not oriented toward procreation is not only deficient, but immoral.”
That is a bald-faced lie.
@ Everone else reading this blog… Read the Theology of the Body for yourselves, and do not take some combox troll’s uninformed word on the matter as though it were the Gospel truth. Read it, and you know WHY the Church teaches what she teaches.
As for Theology of the Body, it is beautiful, but it still fails to adequately explain why any act that is not oriented toward procreation is not only deficient, but immoral.
The Catholic Church believes that for any sexual activity to be moral, it must be oriented toward procreation. (Or more specifically, every orgasm must be oriented toward procreation.) But the Church cannot justify this position other than with its own bare assertions. Even if completely natural sexual intercourse is the ultimate sign of unity in marriage, this does not logically make any other sexual activity immoral.
Some will say these activities are unnatural, but even if they are, unnatural does not mean immoral. Charting, analysis, and abstinence during the fertile period are hardly natural either.
Furthermore, to say that intercourse in the infertile period, during pregnancy, or after menopause is “open to life”, but wearing a condom during ovulation (which can fail, leading to pregnancy) is not “open to life” is sophistry. To say that it is more moral for couples to endure the frustration of abstinence than to freely give each other mutual sexual pleasure is absurd. Unless, of course, the Church believes that sexual pleasure in itself is bad, in which case, I strongly disagree with them.
I was very pleased that you came up with questions that did not involve “but how will you live without the Eucharist?”
The only other choice to birth control is not abortion…it is accepting the gift God gave you and raising it. Another choice against birth control is abstaining from sexual relations until you are ready for this beautiful gift. I know we Americans are not used to abstaining from anything. We eat what we want, Drink what we want, and do what we want. We never stop to think is this good for us or for others. We are in a sad state because of lack of self control. I always wonder why men don’t complain and say how life is not fair because they can’t have children. Women and men are just different why we think this is unfair I don’t understand. Men are meant to do the work in the church and we women play a different role. This doesn’t make women lesser, just different. The reason we don’t have enough priest is because we don’t encourage young men to do so and pray diligently for the priesthood. If we stopped complaining and started praying the church would be a better organization.
For those who are sincere Truth-seekers of the Catholic Churche’s inspired and inspirational profession of the giftedness, beauty, and purpose of God’s creation of human sexuality, .. I suggest that you be open the study of our beloved Pope John Paul 11’s encyclical “Theology of the Human Body”. If you should find that too imposing, there are a number of c.d.‘s and abreviated literature which easily accessible. Be prepared to be disturbed if not awed, or at the very least, enlightened.
Dear Jamie,
Thank you for your post & congratulations on your happy marriage & the blessings of 4 children.
Barrier methods of contraception are not abortifacient & their connection to abortion could be called a “slppery slope arguement”, but I think it runs deeper than that.
There’s so much new, good literature on NFP out there.Maybe you could just take a second look? It is a counter-cultural thing & challenges pretty much everything society & popular culture offer to women today.
Wishing you & your family God’s blessings!
Beautifully written and reasoned piece. Obviously divinely influenced as well. The difficult fact for us flawed humans to comprehend is that not all are chosen. Why we were is a very humbling mystery. But facts are facts and despite a traitor and 10 other cowards among the 12, our church was founded by Christ himself in Caesarea Philippi when the self described “sinful man” answered the only question that really matters with the declaration of faith that no man revealed to him, but the Father himself. And since that day, and forever more, try as they might, the gates of Hell have not prevailed against Her. May God bless and protect the Catholic Church and delay not His return.
The whole suggestion that using contraception leads directly to abortion is just a slippery slope argument. My husband of 14 years and I have been using a barrier method and have had 4 children with no unintended pregnancies. We are a very happily married couple with no sense of not giving of ourselves to one another. We acknowledge God’s sovereignty and would welcome any other children He wanted to give us, but NFP does not really give women control over their bodies. We know many Catholic couples who have far more children in far too short of a timespan than they can truly handle (including psych commitments, squalid conditions, and neglect). Some of them feel guilty for using NFP with a contraceptive mindset, and this leads to further stress. I think of large families as something of a charism. Some people have it, and some don’t. Children suffer when their parents can’t handle a large family. The church’s policy on contraception is a barrier to our coming into full communion, so we will remain Protestants who have only the policy on contraception to protest.
“The state didn’t see fit because in a horrifying number of instances the archdiocese kept the abuse secret long enough for the statute of limitations to run out.
No, if there was a conspiracy to cover it up and it can be proven, the statute of limitations is extended.”
You know what would have obviated the need to prove a conspiracy and similarly the need to even consider statutes of limitation: Cardinal Dolan and other archdiocese of Milwaukee officials reporting child molesting priests to authorities as soon as they discovered them. But that just didn’t happen.
I was being tactful, Scott W., but if you want to know, what is wrong with mutual masturbation and oral sex if these are enjoyable to both spouses? The couple is not interfering with the sexual act, they are doing something else instead. Why are the genitals off-limits unless you want to procreate? Perhaps you don’t like this, which is fine, but other people do.
Why should couples feel guilty for giving pleasure to each other? It doesn’t make any sense.
Likewise, what is wrong with committed gay couples doing the same thing. The Bible verses against homosexuality are all about male homosexuality and heavily suggest that the real problem is anal sex. This makes sense from a health perspective, especially in the ancient world.
The entire justification on both of these issues seems to be “because we say so” based on an ancient misunderstanding of biology.
The Catholic Church was involved with genocide in Croatia during WW2. They also endorsed forced conversions to Catholicism.
Genocide isn’t something you rationalize. It’s something that people are brainwashed into believing will improve their situation.
I can see you are a savvy and skilled debater, Scott W.
I’m not here to debate, but to warn. The fact that you won’t name the act which you want approval for should be your first clue that it is perverted. If you are doing it, stop. If you are planning on doing it, don’t.
The state didn’t see fit because in a horrifying number of instances the archdiocese kept the abuse secret long enough for the statute of limitations to run out.
No, if there was a conspiracy to cover it up and it can be proven, the statute of limitations is extended.
Mike,
Bertrand Russell was completely wrong about Christ. Jesus is the best attested figure of ancient history. We know more about Him than anyone else in the ancient world. If you want to know about the most important, the most amazing man to have ever lived then read the gospels. There is no one who comes close to the person of Christ. He alone is worthy of your worship.
Quoting Scott W: “Since the state did not see fit to get rid of them by putting them in jail”
The state didn’t see fit because in a horrifying number of instances the archdiocese kept the abuse secret long enough for the statute of limitations to run out.
“Do you want a long expensive process in which the perv remains a priest on the payroll while he games the system endlessly or do you want a short process in which he gets some money and we are rid of him?”
I’d like a short process that pays perv priests NOTHING to get rid of them. I believe we have something like that known as…calling the police.
I’d also like a system that perverts can’t game so easily.
“I, for one, am not ready to have hysterics about Plan B–at least till I know the cost of the full canonical rigamarole for laicizing a perv.”
Oh, that’s right don’t protect children and stand up for justice until we get the price tag from the Vatican because I mean if it costs too much to laicize a sexual abusive priest then we should just forget it.
@Claire: So, what exactly is wrong with couples um…“enjoying” each other in a way that is not physically or psychologically unhealthy without having actual intercourse?
..“No one knows if this Jesus Christ existed, and if he did, NOTHING is known about him!” Bertrand Russell “Why I am not a Christian” 1928
Sure, I’ll start by answering the question of your name: no, not every sperm is sacred.
I can see you are a savvy and skilled debater, Scott W.
Anyone else care to try?
1. And?
2. No.
“Because ‘I want sex, but not children’ isn’t an adult answer.”
1. I wasn’t talking about anything that could lead to babies. To paraphrase Bill Clinton, that isn’t sex.
2. Doesn’t this also apply to the infertile period of NFP?
As far as the Milwaukee thing, Mark Shea has it right:
“In the end, the story seems to be that Dolan tried to get rid of bad priests as fast as possible, which used to be a good thing according to the Times. Since the state did not see fit to get rid of them by putting them in jail and the canonical process might for all I know, have cost *more* than this route (has anybody done the calculations?) I don’t think it’s particularly a slam dunk that this was a bad way to go. In the end, the tradeoff is between asking, “Do you want a long expensive process in which the perv remains a priest on the payroll while he games the system endlessly or do you want a short process in which he gets some money and we are rid of him?” I, for one, am not ready to have hysterics about Plan B–at least till I know the cost of the full canonical rigamarole for laicizing a perv.”
John, your comment is incoherent.
If a couple wants to enjoy each other’s bodies, and is doing so in a healthy way, then where is the harm?
Because “I want sex, but not children” isn’t an adult answer.
ya know, it would be one thing if people criticized churchmen for wrongdoing and left it at that, but no. Every naysayer has a pathological need to try to make it a uniquely Catholic problem and that some Catholic practice or teaching causes it. Well, when one opens that door, comparisons to other sectors of society are fair and reasonable. And what irks the naysayers is that when we do, we find that there is not a shred of evidence that supports singling out Catholics, Catholic teaching or practice, so the only thing they have left is bunch of noise about changing the subject when it was they that opened the door.
Meanwhile we already have a model of uncelibate priests, democratic government, and women “priests”—The Episcopal Church; and guess what? People are leaving that denomination faster than if the buildings were on fire. It’s no mystery why. When your denomination is a mirror image of stupid secular progressivism anyone can get by walking out the door or turning on the TV, why waste an hour on Sunday hearing about it?
Gay AND lesbian couples, that is.
I get why hormonal birth control, IUDs, and sterilization are wrong (it is wrong to harm your body for sex, which is what all of these do to some degree or another), and I can even understand why barrier methods and withdrawal are less than ideal.
.
But why must not only every act of intercourse, but every orgasm be “open to life”? This seems more rooted in an incorrect understanding of biology than in theology. If a couple wants to enjoy each other’s bodies, and is doing so in a healthy way, then where is the harm? And that goes for gay couples too.
Jennifer, in expanding your reason #1 (Are you sure members of the Church hierarchy are worse than anyone else?) you inadvertently cheapen the very institution you seek to defend. Members of the Catholic hierarchy are no worse than any else…hardly a rallying cry. That could be a new promotional tagline: “The Catholic Clergy: No Worse than Anyone Else”
Perhaps members of the hierarchy are no better than anyone else as well.
You are like the archdiocese of Milwaukee, which recently revealed documents show offered admitted child abusing priests payouts of $20,000 to be voluntarily laicized and avoid the long costly process of an official lacization procedure. Nice to know there’s an express lane out of the clergy for child abusers that avoids prosecution and shunts the abusers into society sans restrictions.
It’s not that people don’t believe the Catholic hierarchy were the only people that failed to protect children it’s that people don’t want to financially or morally support a group that failed hundreds of times to properly deal with morally unfit, mentally ill, abusive priests.
As a recently returned Catholic I have a hard time reconciling myself to obeying an institution so resistant to change, so love in with secrecy, an instituion that too often answers legitimate questioning with shrill calls for obidience.
Fortunately there are priests who are brave enough to opppose the hierarchy. The association of Catholic priests, which claims 25% of the priests in Ireland as members, openly called on the Vatican to end compulsory celibacy for priests, allow for the open elections of bishops, and the ordination of women.
Don’t underestimate the morality, sense, and bravery of the Catholic priesthood!
If you look at the ratio of molester to employee, I think you’ll find more pedofiles per 10 priests. Stil leaving the church, not because I’m an atheist, because I think you’re bigotry is unbearable.
Maria, who told you that you could no longer receive communion because you were divorced? Was it a nun or priest or lay person? Did you question it and seek a ‘second opinion’? Did you try to find out for sure if that was true? Or is there more to the story that you do not say? Were you remarried without an annulment? That would be cause to not receive the Eucharist, but if you are simply divorced and not remarried/living with a boyfriend, you are NOT barred from receiving the Eucharist. I know that for a fact and I am in that situation myself.
Wow… Jennifer, this is magnificent. Thank you for all you do.
Está muy bien, pero hoy ya no convencen las palabras. CONVENCE EL TESTIMONIO DE LOS SANTOS.
When the Catholic Church agrees with God’s morality and that makes you mad, it’s time to examine why you object to it.
Humans are always rationalizing their wickedness and turning it into goodness. You’ll find that out just as soon as you mention the lifestyles today were called abomination by the Lord. People actually just hate to hear what the Lord has to say, so they will ignore it and call you evil names. Hey, I didn’t say it. The Lord did. I just agree with him. Heaven forbid such a crime!
@SherryBourbon “I can’t understand why the church is so against using artificial birth control rather than NFP because the intention is the same and that is “I don’t want anymore children.”
Try this analogy, maybe it will help. “I can’t understand why the Church is so against eating food and then vomiting it up rather than not eating, because the intention is the same and that is “I don’t want to gain weight.”
@ Post by SherryBourbon on Thursday, May 31, 2012 3:39 PM (EST):
Dear SherryBourbon—
Regarding this…
>>> I can’t understand why the church is so against using artificial birth control rather than NFP
...the answer is that the former is “saying no to God and closing the door and locking it forcibly” whereas the later is saying “God I would rather not be you make the final decision and I may close the door a bit but I am not going to close it all the way and I am not going to lock it out of respect for you, the Author of Life”. Does that make sense to you?
Yours in Christ,
—Mark
A posting to your very interesting debate from far away Germany.
My opinion in that matter: Church in Christ’s sense, meaning his body IN this world, each one of us believers in Him being part of it, clergy as well as non clergy, has always been connected with the secular system ruling this world according to the natural darwinistic rivalry fighting for dominance over others.
“Connected” not necessarily meaning being forced to adapt or adopt that system and give the church the same structure as secular systems like monarchy, democracy, etc. That’s why Jesus told us to serve each other and not dominate each other. HE wishes to be the real “government” in our life. That’s not anarchy as one might think at first. The real owner shepard will lead us better than a hired shepard who only works for the money and escapes when the enemy comes. However is there a need for members telling others where to go and what to do according to the scripture and the will of God.
But the church is IN this world, connected in every single person with the other natural system to make profit and success to “survive” in this world. That means you and I have always to ask: this or that way? Not only we laymen but every priest, bishop, pope is both: In this world - and in God’s kingdom as is realised already here on earth, in the church. The clergy, too, in every minute of their lives have to decide who is Lord, Jesus or Satan, the latter teaching: No choice, you have to do that to become and get what you want, the job you like; everybody does that, look around! Etc.
Why should a clergy be better in personal decisions, or a medieval “Christian” king wiser to obey Christ’s commandment to love and forgive - when an Old Testament Scripture says: the guilty one has to be killed, stoned, thrown out of the community, etc.? In a double function as a ruler and spirirual leader he will say: “It’s law, it has to be obeyed, the witch or heretic has to die! God’s will. On the scaffold with him, she’s a witch, he is a heretic, better for them to die here than to lose eternal life!” This double function of church leaders has caused a great loss of moral authority to the church. The church is a mixed community of saints and sinners, i.e. people being saint or sinner in one person in every single hour of our lives. Like Peter, who swore before Christ that he would never leave Him and the same night denied to know Him when he was identified as Jesus’ disciple. Thank God, Jesus knows how weak we are and we can be forgiven when we repent.
The church’s enemies however aiming to destruct, accuse, or split the Body of Christ, will always look for something to be successful. The best way is to propagate where Christians fall and do not what Christ has demanded. Then they can say: look at them, they are not better than anybody else, mostly worse because they’re all hypocrites! Then the accuser can feel really good, because everybody else can see, how much better he is when he leaves this hypocrasy. This is the cleverest way to work against Christ: not to help improve the situation but to accuse and destroy. I think a proof for Satan acting in background.
I can’t understand why the church is so against using artificial birth control rather than NFP because the intention is the same and that is “I don’t want anymore children. And further which is the greater sin—-using birth control or having a dozen children you can’t afford and watching them starve to death like we see in many countries.
No person who believes in the Real Presence will EVER leave the Holy Catholic Church. What if one should gain the whole world and lose the one thing that is needful? (Synthesis mine.) It is folly to leave Christ, to leave the Eucharist, Jesus himself, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. It is truly an honor, privilege, and an unmerited gift of infinite good—all good, all beauty, all truth, all life!!! Who would give up everything just to get what is (by comparison) nothing? Exceptions of insanity aside (obviously) it seems to me that the only answer is that only a person who does not believe in the Real Presence will leave the Catholic Church. It may be just spiritual blindness or it could be pride. Ah, pride, the old enemy, the fallen humanity. But there is no Life other than in Him. We can ask, with the apostles, where is there to go? Only He, Jesus, is the Life and He offers us Communion with Him through the miracle of the Eucharist. We must pray for such.
I was told that I was no longer “allowed to recieve communion”.
Not much we can do with your account without more context. Leaving an abusive husband would not be grounds for bar from communion. Getting remarried without an annulment would be. It seems like you received bad information.
Dear Sirs:
I was a cradle Catholic and I loved my church. I was totally involved in my church even as a child. Even as an adult I was teased about being so involved in the church, I was nicknamed Sister Maria. I did it out of love for my fellow parishoners,and for God mostly. We are all called to be the hands and feet for Jesus, some listen and some do not. My problem with the church stemed from “annulments”. After my divorce, and it was biblical, I was told that I was no longer “allowed to recieve communion”.
Now when you stay in a horrible marriage for 20 yrs., because the church told me too. Why is it I get the punishment for the sins of my ex because he cheated, verbally abused, threated my life with a gun, and in the end almost killed me? I left him, so I’m wrong in the church’s eyes? So my answer to the preist when he wanted to know why I left the church ,and abandoned my relgion? My answer was simple, I never lost my relgion or my faith,but my church left me. I was abandoned by “the church”. Now I attend a non-denominational church and I’m involved with them. My gifts were not waisted in all of those years with the Catholic church, because hopefully they learned by my example. I still pray for them to have a conversion of heart towards many people who are pushed away from Catholism for this and many other man-made reasons. It’s just not always BC.(biblically correct)
Blessings In Christ ><>
Some-but not all-reasons why I will not leave the Church…
The Communion of Saints (canonized and just ordinary people/celebrities)
Purgatory
Confession whether I need it or not
The peace and quiet to calm me down and set thoughts straight in my mind in front of the Eucharist
3am,
You said, “Not so sure I agree. The unbiblical doctrine of celibacy for the priesthood could easily create an abnormal sex drive that might manifest itself in various ways.”
Well, that’s a nice theory, but the actual statistics show that the abuse rate is higher in homes and schools than among Catholic priests. The rate of cover-up is just as high, if not higher, in homes and schools as well.
Seriously - you think a celibate heterosexual man, if deprived of sex long enough, will start to seek out homosexual encounters with minors?!?!? No, the problem was a homosexual subculture in the Church…not celibacy.
boy, 3AM you sure like to cherry pick your scripture and even then, you misread it. “An elder (bishop) must be the husband of one wife” responds to polygamy, not celibacy. Do you ignored St. Paul when he says that while it is “better to marry than to burn” it is best to remain celibate for God, if one is called to it? Also, I’m sorry but as someone who was sexually abused by an UNCELIBATE father I have always rejected the STUPID idea that “celibacy brings molestation”. Tell that to the kids in public schools being moleested by their UNCELIBATE teachers. Tell it to all the kids being abused by their uncelibate Baptist pastors and parents. Also, at some point in your life, you must have been celibate. Did your celibacy make you go around molesting kids? Don’t be stupid.
Why is it so difficult for people to think?
I should point out that this whole sexual “release” thing is basically Freudian “repression” nonsense, which, if you know anything about Freud’s view of religion, is not a worldview Christians should casually accept. As far as unbiblical—Sola Scriptura takes the cake.
Celibacy for the priesthood is not unbiblical, and abuse rates are consistent across the board of all denominations and all professions.
in respect of disrespectful behaviour (yes—I am not from the US) towards the planet, polluting your environment
So let me get this straight - polluting the nevironment is bad, but pumping your body full of synthetic hormones that ultimately end up polluting the environment is good?
Is it too much to ask for a little intellectual consistency?
“A priest is no more likely to abuse a child than a male schoolteacher, and a bishop is no more likely to cover it up than a school administrator.”
Not so sure I agree. The unbiblical doctrine of celibacy for the priesthood could easily create an abnormal sex drive that might manifest itself in various ways. A married schoolteacher would have a Biblical means of release which is denied to the priest. That may be the reason that Paul said “an elder must be the husband of one wife.”
@enness
“Tom R.: perhaps, then, Jesus’s advice to his own disciples will resonate freshly with you—“Do what they tell you, for they sit in the seat of Moses; but do not follow their example, for they do not practice what they preach.”
Sorry, but it doesn’t resonate at all. If a pedophile priest tells a child “come see me after mass in the vestry” as part of penance, or instructs an altar boy to do so after mass, do you really want that child to what the priest, representing Christ and the Church, has told him?
My only beef with the Church is that it seems like it’s out of touch with its own teachings and it’s full of people who have all the recommendations for everyone else, but seem fickle and wary when it comes to improving themselves. If you want me to have faith in something you believe in, then the burden on proving it to me is on yourselves. Do you really believe that the least among you is the greatest? Do you believe in the beatitudes? Blessed are the poor, blessed are the peacemakers, the meek inherit the earth? How does that justify itself with people who are acting defensive, too proud to be corrected, too vain to admit any fault, fearful of loosing prestige, reputation and power? Seems to me that the focus for these people is not on forwarding Christ in the world, but just on forwarding themselves and their personal agendas. The are more apt to act out of the notion that God appointed them personally as the general manager of the universe, to regard their own affairs as achieving the same respectability as the divine, to disregard their frailty, their humanity, their narrow-minded, puny, greedy, amateur and shortsighted attempts at justice as being on par with God himself. They seem to have more hope in themselves than in God, that they want me to believe in them instead of differing to Him. It would seem that they are at odds with the very trust and confidence they would hope to gain from me.
Veronica Guerra - I love your post - It is exactly how I feel about these ‘cultural Catholics’ like Quindlen who drag us all down and represent the rot that has been within our Church for ages. The hardest thing for me to do as a Catholic Christian is to continue to pray for these elitist lost souls, persons who had the baptism, the catechesis, and, I am sure, some good influence from priests, sisters and lay Catholics over the years, yet still reject the incredible beauty and truth of our faith and tradition. Luckily, the new converts to our faith represent quality, vs. the quantity of supposed believers we had in the past.
People, get the Cathechism of the Catholic Church. In there you will find many, many answers to why Church teaching. (which is binding according to Jesus) is the way it is.
The other day a guy was telling me that he was leaving the church because he didn’t believe a guy can forgive sins and what do you know, in the CCC it says “only God can forgive sins!” ha! And Jesus added, “the sins you forgive will be forgiven and the sins you dont forgive won’t be forgiven”
And about the predator priests, can u really believe that it really is as bad a the media makes it look to be when that same media doesn’t even report on something as epic as last week’s historic lawsuit? It really gives you some perspective on the agenda behind it. Don’t fall pray to that!!!
Everytime I hear someone say its the pedophilia scandals that is the reason they leave the Catholic Church or condemn the church I always tell them to show me where in the Catechism, Canon Law, Papal Encyclicals or any official church document/teaching that states that priest should do these things, my gut feeling is this women left the church not just because of the “gynecology” issues, but the fact that she and others like her have a liberal worldview and not a Catholic one, so like satan they will not serve! so good riddance…and take pelosi, biden, sotomayor, sebelius and others like them with her…its time for the church to clean house of this toxic liberalism that has infiltrated the church.
WSquared,
You are incorrect on a number of points. The church did not begin also at “Incarnation at the Annuciation as well”. It begins at Pentecost. Nowhere in Scripture does it say that the church is “built up through Communion—the eating and drinking of the Body and Blood of Christ (and partaking of the Sacraments that initiate us into that Body and allow us to discern it in order to receive it worthily)—with Him.”
Do you know that Paul is the only apostle that mentions the Lord’s supper only once and very briefly?
It seems to me that Catholics have become the radicals again for being steadfast in our beliefs that life and death are Gods purview. Respect for life conception to death life is sacred. Consistency we are hated for. Male priests from our inception. Consistency we are hated for. Now the liberals that we stood with for civil rights hate us. When we stand for the unborn. The social justice and compassionate government we fought for now compels us to violate our beliefs and sacraments for thier idea of equality and compassion. When we say you dont determine the sacraments we are bigots.
Well the lessons Jesus taught us say we must be the justice,the compassion,the care for the sick,the steadfast ones. Ceasar has never provided these things . We must be the consistent,conservative,radical, people we are called to be. Let the chaff fall from the wheat. Freedom is only just when practiced with self control. Pick up your crosses and suffer for christ with joy in your heart .
Alvin, the Church does not only begin at Pentecost. She begins with the Incarnation at the Annuciation as well, when Mary said, “be it done to me according to Thy Word.” Furthermore, the inerrant Word of God is made available to us through the Incarnation. The Church is the Body of Christ, built up through Communion—the eating and drinking of the Body and Blood of Christ (and partaking of the Sacraments that initiate us into that Body and allow us to discern it in order to receive it worthily)—with Him.
megan, nobody is trying to tell a child, “He’s a bishop, so what he did is okay.” Rather, we know full well—because Christ told us—that there will be great sinners in the Church, and that we should pray for them.
In general, everybody who is still alive should see their lives as a gift: Christ ain’t done with you yet. He ain’t done with you, me, any bishop, priest, or anyone else. The Catholic Church is not a social club for saints; it is a hospital for sinners that will turn us into saints if we cooperate. Christ is the Divine Physician, and the fact of the matter is that we often react to God’s grace kicking and screaming (let’s ask ourselves how many of us make all manner of excuses not to go to Confession—the priest is “mean,” etc. etc. when we should know that no Sacrament is contingent upon the holiness of priest, but on Christ acting through him—but who yet go to Communion anyway with grave, even mortal, sins on our souls because we are not discerning the Body as we should). The Sacraments of the Church are conformed to the life of Christ, which is the life of the Cross. When we run from the Cross and don’t receive the Sacraments worthily, what do we expect but eventual unbelief? God’s grace is abundant, but in the end, the choice to cooperate with it is ours. That goes for everybody, hierarchy included. Furthermore, trusting Christ, not men, also means trusting that Christ will form and fashion those whom He has called into what He means them to be. Is this hard? Of course it is. And it takes a lifetime.
For the record, the same level of distrust that people claim to level at the hierarchy of the Church and indeed any Catholic is the same level of distrust that I would level at themselves and everybody else in the world, including myself and my own feelings. Were it not for Christ. It is only He and His Body and choosing to partake of it worthily and therefore live in Him that would ever allow my (or anyone’s) trust to deepen—trust in Christ, and ultimately trust in others, despite their sins. There are no innocents here. My sins are legion, and so are everybody else’s.
As for “by their fruits, ye shall know them,” there is, after all, the Communion of Saints, that Great Cloud of Witnesses, in which we profess to believe when we say the Apostles’ Creed. We pray every Mass during the Eucharistic prayers to be counted among God’s elect, among the saints who have eternal life. Or have we forgotten? ...but then, awful Modernist architecture and brutalized, stripped-down sanctuaries that amount to denying the Incarnation—the Body of Christ built up by Christ in those who live in Him through the Sacraments—does tend to give us spiritual amnesia, doesn’t it? The Church is everybody who is in Communion with Christ—the Church Triumphant (the saints in Heaven), the Church Suffering (all souls in Purgatory), and the Church Militant (that’s us!). She is a spiritual organism that is also a spiritual process and more than a mere human organization. And while we aren’t saints yet, are we even aware or even grateful for how God’s grace works in our own lives, especially when we know how much we struggle with our sins?
manticore, you’re being judgmental. Are you not aware that everything you’ve said—particularly those parts about Phariseeism—could be said of the attitudes that you’ve just expressed? Indeed, not a heap of dogmatic blathering can amount to Him, and that most certainly includes your spewing of the usual self-justification for self-popery (and the tyranny that fosters, too). As for discouraging close knowledge of the Bible there is Pius XII’s encyclical “Divino Afflante Spiritu” (1943), and the fact that Catholic doctrine tends to unfold gradually rather than be characterized by sharp changes and historical “progressivism.” The question was what Catholic biblical exegesis is even supposed to look like. For one, how does one read the Bible? It doesn’t interpret itself, and what makes any of us think that we have the authority to interpret it correctly? Christ—the Word Made Flesh—is the true heremeneutic for reading it, and Catholics believe that He is Truly Present in the Eucharist. So what would even make you think that your reading of the Bible is “close”? Benedict XVI raises that rather pertinent question in both volumes of Jesus of Nazareth, as does Robert Barron in The Priority of Christ. Also, the Bible was meant to be read aloud, as it is at every Mass (and indeed, during the High Mass, it is meant to be chanted). Attending Mass every day for three years would eventually allow you to cover all of the Bible. God does not need the Church, but we do. So He gave it to us, and she is a gift. God is not bound by the Sacraments, but He does indeed act through them. That is what the Church is—Communion with Christ—and it’s how God builds it up and cleanses it.
Scott, I’ve not heard that Ghandi quote before. Very intriguing. Where did you find it?
=
Tom R.: perhaps, then, Jesus’s advice to his own disciples will resonate freshly with you—“Do what they tell you, for they sit in the seat of Moses; but do not follow their example, for they do not practice what they preach.”
Oak Tree: there are many places I could start with you post, but I’m just going to take one: “And to KJK - Jesus didn’t create any priests. Apostles were not priests.”
-
Okay, what do you call people who are told first-hand to reenact Christ’s sacrifice with bread and wine; receive the gift of the Holy Spirit; are granted the authority to forgive sins in His name; have their minds opened by Christ to understand scripture; etc.?
=
Anon: “Church leadership is quick to criticize government action that does not pracise subsidarity but they are absolutely the worst offenders.”
-
I think you mean to say Republicans. Contrary to popular belief, they aren’t one and the same. Or did you forget that the USCCB supports universal healthcare?
-
“Do you think the Holy Spirit advised the church to burn people at the stake during the Iquisition?”
-
It is my understanding that punishment was the domain of the *civil* authorities. In any case, if you dig through enough dirt you’ll find that local politics have as much to do with witch-hunts as anything. In Salem, it was conveniently also an avenue to acquire someone’s property. Last I checked, coveting thy neighbor’s goods was explicitly forbidden.
“The proscription against contraception does not make sense—the rationale given for it is gobbledegook.”
-
Derrick, that entirely depends on whom you ask. It may be gobbledygook to you, but it makes perfect sense to me, and the more I learn about the various contraceptive methods the more sense it makes. I don’t suppose you’ll take the liberty of asking yourself whether *your* assumptions and *your* understanding may actually be in the wrong.
=
Beverly:
“Women are second class citizens as we cannot be priests or deacons”
-
What?? How does it follow? Aren’t you the one implying that priesthood is the be-all, end-all and everything else is somehow inferior? I don’t accept that. Just because I am a woman, all gender relations do not have to involve power struggle.
-
“priests are not allowed to marry (have known several good men who have left for that reason)”
-
They may be good men but perhaps they would not have been good priests—maybe it just was not for them. I believe certain things happen for a reason, and better they figured it out early than several years into it, no?
=
padraig: “I am tired of every homily or article being about contraception or abortion or leaving the church.”
-
I was in disbelief, so I scanned the Register front page and checked the Daily News. I am at a loss to know where you are looking, that ‘every article’ is about these topics. I would say maybe half. You’ve got to take some initiative there, friend. Even then you have to expect that the particular moral travesties of our day are going to generate some talk.
Rick:
“Diocean Priests should be given the option of marrying before ordination.”
-
You mean after? They are given the option. It’s known as ‘be a priest, or don’t be a priest.’
-
“Gay People ought to again be able to have their commitment to each other blessed by the Church. In the 11th and 12th Century, the Church blessed such unions.”
-
No the Church did not. Jimmy Akin, whose blog listing appears in close proximity to Jennifer’s, has a takedown of this nonsense that is too detailed and too recent to give you a pass.
-
“The Church needs to take a realistic stand on Contraception! Most Catholics who are married use Contraception. The only other alternative is abortion!”
-
No. it. is. not. That’s just silly. I’ll gladly explain why, but I’m hoping you don’t really need me to.
-
“And the Church increasingly wants priests to be married”
-
What Church are you talking about? The Church I know is not a democracy.
I do believe Jennifer, you just knocked it out of the park!
In my own conversion to Catholicism I faced serious challenges, including the fact that I was diagnosed with a Deep Vein Thrombosis (blood clot in a major vein) which was caused by a genetic clotting disorder that’s exacerbated by pregnancy. My doctors told me I absolutely had to use contraception.”
-
Jennifer, I sure hope they didn’t suggest the Pill! Irony of ironies!
I do believe that the sexual abuse issue is horrific, but the media has made it seem as if EVERY priest has abused children and our Church has suffered greatly for it.
When I read about people leaving the Catholic church because of the ped.priest, I run through this scenario: “I am a Jew in 30 AD or so and I have met Jesus and I am following Him. I know he is the Messiah. Then I hear about the evil Judas and I say. Who would follow such a Messiah with a priest like Judas? So, I would leave the Church.” Anna needs to grow up, after all, it’s been over 60 years.
manticore,
You don’t seem to understand the Catholic Church or her teachings very well, and until you do , you should be careful not to make such universal statements.
Just for a few instances:
1) “Far, far, far, far, far, far, far…etc….worse. This follows inevitably from the claims the CC makes about itself, if one accepts they are true.”
Where does the Church claim that by virtue of the fact that one is a leader of the Church, one becomes a paragon of virtue? The existence of Judas alone refutes this idea.
2) “As indeed He is not: it is heretical to say grace cannot be found outside the CC.”
No Catholic believes that grace cannot be found outside the CC. That is not part of Church teaching, and in fact Vatican II directly contradicts the idea that grace can only be found in the CC.
3) “it will not settle for anything short of absolute & uncritical obedience & belief. There is no mental space in the CC for criticizing or doubting the Church”
That is not true at all. There is plenty of space to criticize the Church and the leaders of the Church. As far as belief in the Church’s dogmas, yes. As a thought experiment, what would you think of the statement “Jesus is totalitarian; he will not settle for anything short of absolute & uncritical obedience and belief in Him.”?
“Like Quindlen, many people who abandon their Catholic faith still believe in God and still strive to be good, moral people; they choose to leave because they think that they will find these things they desire—God, freedom, equality—outside the walls of the Church.”
-
## It’s difficult for them, for a very simple reason. They have been taught - conditioned ? brain-washed ? - to be so dependent on the Church that without it, they are nothing: they have been made dependent on it. This happens because the CC is totalitarian - it will not settle for anything short of absolute & uncritical obedience & belief. There is no mental space in the CC for criticising or doubting the Church. As for “they think that they will find these things they desire—God, freedom, equality—outside the walls of the Church.” - who told God He could not be found outside the CC ? To supppose he can’t be, is blasphemous: it reduces the God of all the earth, Who has created all things from nothing by the word of His power, to a wretched little fetish, a god to be shaken by the medicine-men of the Catholic tribe at the tribes of its opponents. God is not juju, to be shaken like a rattle at those who object to Catholicism. Yet to deny that He - not the CC - rules how men encounter him, reduces Him to nothing better than tribal juju.
1. Are you sure members of the Church hierarchy are worse than anyone else?
Answer: Far, far, far, far, far, far, far…etc….worse. This follows inevitably from the claims the CC makes about itself, if one accepts they are true.
-
2. Are you sure your faith life would be better outside of the Church?
Answer: No doubt of it whatever: having belonged to other groups. They make Catholicism look like the rotting corpse it is (thanks to the beasts in mitres). Being Catholic is an occasion of sin, bec/ thinking abt. the Church merely shows how horrible wrecked & toxic it is. It’s an ideal environment for causing unbelief.
-
3. Are you sure the Church’s teachings are wrong?
Answer: No doubt of it whatever. Even if they are true, no-onr ever asks whether they are good. They are often not good. The Pharisees were right on a lot of things, but they were very severely rebuked by Jesus in Matthew 23. They were so wrapped up in their right-eousness that they crucified Him, just as the Church has so often crucified those who belong to Him, as in the paedophilia scandals. The Church put its ego first, & sacrificed them to its ego. It adores itself, & not God, or it would love those whom He loves, & would have His priorities, instead of trampling on them & on Him.
-
4. Are you sure the Church’s doctrines aren’t divinely inspired?
Answer: Even the Church is not mad enough to claim that. So it’s a daft as well heretical question. For the rest, see 3. above. Inspired =///= good. A good Church would bear good fruit, not the Dead Sea fruits of clericalism, arrogance, deceit, faction, unbelief, uncharity, & others of the same rotten kind. It’s the wrong question anyway - dogma =////= Christ. Only He is is worthwhile. Not heap of dogmatic blathering can amount to Him. But the Church is so dogma-minded that it is blind to Him: just like the Pharisees. Dogma is not even the Wisdom of God, but at best only an incomplete expression of it. The Church feeds us stones & vipers, not bread. It points us to itself, not to Christ. And that is idolatry.
-
5. Are you sure we don’t need the Church?
-
Who says the rotting corpse that is the CC is the Church of Christ ? If it does the deeds of darkness, & not of Christ, it is of the darkness & not of Christ. As for “rationalisation”, the flatterers of the CC are always able to find justifications for adoring their idol. The CC is so full of itself that its adorers are unable to imagine that God might not be bound by it. As indeed He is not: it is heretical to say grace cannot be found outside the CC. God does not need the CC. He can raise Churches from the stones if He wishes. The CC is not necessary to God, and there is no reason why it should be necessary to anyone on earth. Other tyrannies have vanished, so this is likely to do so as well. We need Christ, not the monstrous abortion that is the CC; nor any other Church for that matter. Some of us think about these issues - we can’t all be brow-beaten into adoring Rome. Some of us know what moral qualities the Bible requires more of a Church, even if Rome does not. But then, given the Roman record of discouraging close knowledge of of the Bible, it is hardly a surprise if Catholics don’t know what moral qualities God requires of a Church. They are not formed to be effective Christians, but to be conformist Catholics.
I have followed Ms. Quindlen’s articles since I was a young woman in the 1980s—decades ago. Quindlen’s writings have been consistently outside of church teachings. She is about as “Catholic” as Nancy Pelosi. Quindlen quit the church long before the pedophile scandal was known. Bluntly speaking, she’s an atheist, myopic, feminist writer, not talented at all. Her views aren’t Catholic, nor are they valid. It’s a waste of time publishing them here.
With all due respect to Anna Quindlen, she is only formalizing what has been evident for a very longtime. At least she has maintained a shred of personal integrity by publicly leaving. Far better than those CINO’s who remain and subvert internally with their whining, self-centered, ongoing guerrilla warfare. A perfect example is the posting by one Rich Dykstra above. The Women priest and contraception issues have long been settled. Christs’ Church is not a grocery store or a cafeteria. You don’t get to pick and choose. Won’t change, can’t change and Mr Dykstra just continues to prattle along. Please sir, either really take the time to learn the one truth faith or have the decency to leave it and start your own. Anything else is howling at the moon and giving scandal.
To these five questions I would add one more: WHERE DO YOU PLAN TO SPEND]ETERNITY? AND ON WHAT DO YOU BASE YOUR ANSWER? Jesus made it clear in the Gospel of John that “unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you will not have life in you”! He, of course, was referring to the Holy Eucharist
confected only by an ordained priest in the Catholic Church. To decide to “do it my way” is a dangerous and foolish decision. To make that decision based upon the bad behavoir of others is still more foolish.
Upbeat Dad-Barbara,
The church did not make the Bible inspired-inerrant. Jesus’ oral teachings predate the church which was not founded until Pentecost. It is only in the Scriptures that we find the inspired-inerrant Word of God.
In the face of many scandals, I have to reply regarding the Church, with the same words as the disciples did in John 6, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life”
And I would add, “and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy Church founded by Christ”
Interestingly enough, the word I had to enter to post this was “stay12”...yes, I will stay with the Church founded on the 12 Apostles.
Maybe lacking in charity but to the Quindlen’s of the Church - go. There’s the door, don’t let it hit you on the way out. These inane public renunciations, like my 5 year old who crosses her arms and stomps her foot in a display of defiance. Enough already of these self-centered Boomers and their issues with authority. Go. Leave. Buh bye. The 60s are over. Grow up already.
@Christi:
If you want to return to confession behind the veil and use this argument, fine (in fact, that is what I’ve done - I no longer believe the priest needs to know me or counsel me, since his counsel is no more trustworthy than anyone else’s). Perhaps this is why it ALWAYS used to be behind the veil, and there was none of this “lets get to know you and understand your sins” nonsense.
@Upbeat dad:
The problem remains that we’re supposed to trust untrustworthy people, and OBEY them (really - it’s canon law). How can divine inspiration lead to such a situation? I agree with you from a doctrinal point of view, but that doesn’t mean something still isn’t amiss. Your argument, BTW, applies only to the Pope speaking ex cathedra, but it doesn’t apply to the rest of the hierarchy, which is heavily involved in this mess. Again, on what basis are we supposed to TRUST and OBEY these people. “By their fruits ye shall know them” is just a canard?
As much as I believe in the Sacraments, etc. what has recently happened here in my Diocese has made me question do I want to belong to the Catholic church. It’s not my faith in God that has been shaken; it’s my faith in my Church and her clergy. Our particular area has been decimated by poorly managed parish mergers and school closings. Note, I understand the logic behind the mergers - yes, vocations are decreasing and people are leaving for whatever reason in droves. It is how they were handled by the clergy that I take issue with. A “merger” is a joining of equals; the new parish has behaved more like a hostile takeover; rather than weaving in customs and traditions of other parishes (as well as active parishoners), only one’s have been accepted, and the response is “Don’t like it? Then leave.” The lack of communication and organization within the Sacramental Instruction programs has left a number of people questioning if this is what they want to teach their children. Additionally, two local Diocesean schools were closed for overtly and admitted-by-the-Diocese political reasons and by all appearances abetted by the new pastor; a third was permitted to remain open if a number of conditions were met, one of them being a wholesale change of administration. How does a parent say to a child, “He’s a Bishop, so it’s OK that he has treated people like this,” when you wouldn’t accept behavior like this from any other person? I’m not even looking to hold clergy to a “higher” standard; how about just the same “human” standard as all others and following the Golden Rule?
Have there been awful crimes perpetrated? Sure. But I agree—statistics say they’re just as likely anywhere else. (I also am skeptical about many—I’m not naive and think there were zero priests who brutalized children, but I am equally certain there are an equal number coming forward who have seen the financial settlements and want a share.) To answer Question 1 - no, I don’t think it’s better anywhere else. But I don’t need to believe it is—or go anywhere else—to leave the Church. Would I miss the Sacraments? Absolutely. But is Eucharist consecrated and distributed by a traitorous priest really faith-building? Is he human? Yes, but I guess I do expect men who have dedicated their lives to God to live their lives as such, and not just the hour on Sunday morning they are standing on the church’s altar.
Alvin, I hate to tell you this but the Church existed BEFORE the first word of the New Testament was written. The Bible itself says in the New Testament that not every teaching and event of Jesus’ ministry was written down. Nor does the New Testament ever say that the Bible is the only authority for Christian truth.
*
For a very good explanation about Sacred Tradition, which Catholics hold to in conjunction with Sacred Scripture, I recommend the following:
http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2010/09/catholics-you-must-understand-this.html
@ Barbara C. ‘sigh’ yeah, it gets old doesn’t it?
@ Alvin: Actually it’s the other way around, the Bible is part of the Church’s doctrines, which are not “divinely inspired,” but rather…“divinely revealed.” Another way of saying it is that the Church does not teach something because it is in the Bible, rather the something is in the Bible, because it is what the Church teaches. The Church canonized the Bible, remember.
I had a Facebook friend recently post an editorial supporting Quindlen with a whole lot tripe. My friend described the piece as “Good Analysis”. Then I started pointing out to him that if either Quindlen or the Catholic author of the editorial really didn’t know the connection between “theology and gynecology” then why doesn’t they take the time to read Humanae Vitae or crack open the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Then I noted some of the opinions in the piece that were based on uneducated rhetoric rather than fact or any kind of academic integrity.
*
I have more respect for anyone who is willing to learn what the Church actually teaches and still disagrees (or is personally scared to agree) than all of these people who just parrot back what the media tells them that the Church teaches (women should be pregnant all the time) and why (in a misogynistic plot to hold women down).
Does the church teach that its doctrines are “divinely inspired”? If that is the case, then they should be part of the Bible.
Ms Quinlin’s needed to announce that she is leaving Holy Mother Church?
I’ve read her for years and could have sworn she took flight many, many
articles ago! Her books and editorials have always expressed the views of an ultra-feminist, secular-humanist and could never been confused with
those of a practicing Catholic! You can call yourself a Rhodes Scholar but there is more to it than just personal declaration. In fact unless you actually are you could safely be declared a liar to claim what is not yours to claim. Anna Quinlan might understand her craft of writing but one would hardly be well advised to consult her on Catholic matters. For her to announce her departure from the Church as news is moronic.
Scott W. What from Vatican II is the hierarchy not doing? They are not heeding the call to collegiality and subsidarity. Church leadership is quick to criticize government action that does not pracise subsidarity but they are absolutely the worst offenders. This is not like the church of one or two centuries ago. In today’s age of education and information technology those who govern do so only with the consent of the governed. The millions who are leaving the church, all those called by God to be priests who will not sign up to join this leadership team are testimony to the failure of church leadership. Yes the Holy Spirit will guide the church. However even a cursory study of Church history shows how many times the leadership did not listen. Do you think the Holy Spirit advised the church to burn people at the stake during the Iquisition?
What is Hell, but the absence of God? It seems some are hell bent on getting a leg on this process. To abandon Jesus in the Holy Eucharist speaks for itself.
Thank you Jennifer for an excellent, thoughtful response. People turned their backs on Jesus while he was alive and they have been doing it ever since, always with some rationale that they are the real, true holy ones and the Church is wrong about this or that. I guess it will go on until the end of time. I am confident the Church is still the same one founded by Jesus and that it will have his blessing and guidance until the end of time. Not that it’s members are perfect: Jesus picked Judas and he later most maliciously defected, falsely saying he was serving the poor and Israel’s political needs. I am not embarrassed by the Church, even in her darkest moments, for we are to love the Church as we love Christ. The two cannot be separated for he founded the Church and promised to be with her until the end of time. You are a wonderful witness for the rest of us. Thank you.
Anna Quindlen left the church ages ago through automatic excommunication, when she began promoting abortion. When will these liberals stop fooling themselves? It’s like a woman claiming she’s a vegan as she eats steak.
@ Nicole: One other observation, above one poster remarked on the need to reflect more upon the eschaton, that is, death, judgement, heaven, and hell. Sooner or later we will all die, we will all be judged, and few will go to heaven whilst many will go to hell. (n.b. the “few” and “many” characterization is taken straight from the lips Christ himself as recorded in the Gospels)
Ultimately we are all going to heaven or hell and we are all sinners. That means hell is populated with souls who, in their earthly lives, were sinners. That also means that heaven is populated with souls who, in their earthly lives, were also sinners. The difference? Those in hell are the ones who did not repent and reached the moment of truth only to say to the Lord, “MY will be done, and #$%!* you!” And those in heaven are the ones who did repent and reached the moment of truth only to say to the Lord. “THY will be done, and #$%!* me!
@ Nicole: “Most priests are above reproach. So are most football coaches. But I expect more from a priest.”
Nope. All are sinners, and therefore none are above reproach. That’s the point. Were it otherwise we would not need a savior. If you are expecting more from a priest then, you are already on the road to Disappointment City. You and I and everyone here are a called to the same standard of holiness as priests. That’s what sainthood is. Why are we so shocked and appalled when priests sin? Is it because we “expected more from a priest?” Puh-leeeze!!!!!!!! That’s the very nature of sin. Sin is always where it shouldn’t be.
Reading through my comment shows that it’s a little disjointed because I moved things around (I was going to respond to all five questions but got distracted.) I apologize for the disjointed, abrupt nature of my comments. Also: it looked much better with paragraph breaks. Oh well!
@ Oak Tree: A string of histrionics does not an argument make.
In answer to Jennifer’s questions: 1)Of course clergy should be better than lay people - they have chosen to devote their lives to serving God and others. 2) Effectively you’re saying that people of other churches and other religions have a lesser religious life than Catholics do. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, for one, might disagree with that, as might the Dalai Lama 3)“Living without artificial contraception has its challenges” - you bet it does! And coincidentally a baby a year is a neat way to keep a woman out of power and she certainly won’t have too much energy left to challenge the church. Your phrase “artificial contraception” hints that you think that “natural” contraception (aka the rhythm method) is ok - is that what you meant to imply? If so, really? Taking your temperature and examining vaginal mucus before deciding if it’s safe to have sex or not is natural? 4) You ask “Is this Church guided by God in its teachings or not? If it’s not, then there’s no reason to listen to anything it says; if it is, then to say that I knew better than the Church was to say that I knew better than God”. Problem with logic here - you might be more receptive to God’s guidance than the church is. You’ve already pointed out that people in the church are only human 5) So without the catholic church people will be evil? Really? Would that be the same catholic church that hardly spoke out against the Nazis (apart from after the war), the catholic church that supported the atrocious Pavelic regime in Croatia during WW2, the catholic church who supported General Franco? And to KJK - Jesus didn’t create any priests. Apostles were not priests.
Are you sure members of the Church hierarchy are worse than anyone else?
Nope! Not at all. There is dysfunction in every social system ever conceived. It’s impossible to avoid. All individuals are susceptible to sin. However, I don’t believe this is a good measure.
While priests are merely human by chemistry, we do believe they have a supernatural calling. They are ordained members of the Priesthood of Christ. They anoint the sick, they absolve sins. They offer The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. They are trusted with counseling regarding souls. I find this vastly different than a teacher or coach.
Here in Philadelphia the Sandusky scandal is in our news daily, as is the trial of the Church scandal here. People were devastated when they learned of Joe Paterno’s involvement in the Sandusky trial. There was a failure of leadership. A breach of trust. A great disappointment from someone who was such an amazing role-model. Shouldn’t a priest be a greater role model than a football coach.
Most priests are above reproach. So are most football coaches. But I expect more from a priest.
There are many people who are brought into the Catholic Church through tradition and not through vigorous study. Unless someone is very well studied and has a developed faith, overlooking grievous misdeeds who is supposed to be a role model, a spiritual guide and the living hands of Christ is nearly impossible. Scandal and crises and politics (oh, Church politics!) and personal wounds at the hands of people in the Church are driving people away in droves. Many people believe that when they separate themselves from the crisis and the drama, they are able to have faith.
Faith has to be introduced and learned. People who are introduced via a dysfunctional system may not have deep faith, but is that the fault of the individual person or is that a failure of the Church?
@Tom R (10:36) Another poster mentioned Peter, but also think of Judas, hand picked by Jesus, in a position of power within the first Church. Judas was given free will by God, but used it to betray Jesus, then despaired.
In your example of confession: The idea that the effectiveness of the sacraments depends on the moral character of the minister is a heresy called Donatism. Priests ARE human. No person is morally pure. Rather, the sacraments are powerful because of what they are, visible representations of spiritual realities. It really IS the merciful Jesus in the confessional, and the priest is “in persona Christi.”
Ask St. Augustine of Hippo to help you sort through this. He was a staunch defender against Donatism and he and the Holy Spirit will help you, also, my brother.
I say GOOD riddance and don’t let the door hit you on the way out, Anna Quindlen. Please take Maureen Dowd and all the LCWR “nuns” with you. The allure of Kennedy-style — that is, merely ethnic or tribal — Catholicism has faded. Liberal (modernist) “catholics” have been exposed as essentially parasitical — but thanks be to God, the Church’s immune system is getting stronger year by year.
Liberal “catholics” like Anna Quindlen will continue to lobby church leaders to change Catholic teachings on reproductive rights, same-sex marriage and women’s ordination. But thanks to the power of the Holy Spirit they are being replaced by younger men and women who are attracted to the church because of the very timelessness of its teachings.
We are attracted to the philosophy, the art, the literature and the theology that make Catholicism countercultural. They are drawn to the beauty of the liturgy and the church’s commitment to the dignity of the individual. They want to be contributors to that commitment—alongside faithful and courageous bishops who ask them to make sacrifices for the greater glory of God. It is time for faithful Catholics to celebrate their arrival.
I think everyone would benefit by refocusing on the fact that there actually is a heaven and a hell- there really is a God and there is a Satan! As a convert to the Catholic Church from Anglicanism, I had a lot of questions about why and how so much evil can be propagated-even by basicly good people. Reading C.S. Lewis’s “The Screwtape Letters” helped me with this tremendously. It is a dialog between a senior demon and his nephew in which the elder demon advises the younger how to tempt his “subject” away from God and virtue in order to win the subject’s soul for hell.
In trying to cope with such things as the priest sex scandal and the fact that we’ve had 50 years of poor catechesis, it finally dawned on me that the reason is that this is how Satan and his demons operate! They know our human weaknesses and they strive to capitalize on them in every way possible. They especially know how prideful we are (we know what’s best for us after all!)and how we can rationalize anything to make it seem like we are doing the right thing- when in fact it is the exact opposite of the right thing as laid out for us in scripture.
Studying the saints also helped me a lot with this issue. Demons physically fought with many of our greatest saints: St. John Vianney (patron saint of priests) fought with demons on a nightly basis. If every priest read this biography on St. Vianney (“The Cure D’Ars: St. Jean-Marie-Baptiste Vianney”, by Abbe Francois Trochu), and tried to follow his example, the Church would not be able to handle all of the young men who would be knocking on the doors of the seminaries. I recommend that book in particular because of the one endorsement on the back cover- none other than Pope John Paul II!
Padraig: I have never in my life heard a homily about contraception or abortion (or even leaving the Church). Speaking out against the evil of abortion is not equivalent to National Enquirer journalism.
Her dislike of the Catholic Church has been evident from her earliest writing. No surprise here.
I think she will go through 10 different denominations before she leaves Christianity completely.
Number two is the most powerful to me. As a convert, it felt like eternity until I could receive the Eucharist - why would anyone choose to give up the Eucharist? When I shared all of my sins from my pre-Catholic days and the priest absolved me, how light my soul felt - to be truly forgiven! How do people turn away from these sacraments? Most of my Catholic family members have fallen away from the Church (and Christianity altogether) - all I can figure is that they never believed in the Sacraments anyhow??? I wish they could see the Church as I see Her; I feel like a newlywed.
@ padraig: Your ignorance illustrates the author’s point. You drive a wedge between love and theology as though the two were somehow at odds with each other. The English “theology” derives from two Greek words “theos” (God) and “logos” (word). Theology, therefore, refers to words about God, that is, the study of and coming to terms with who God is, and that was at the heart of his ministry. Jesus spoke many words about God, about who God is (Love), moreover he taught that a relationship with God (i.e. a relationship with love) comes with many implications for how we are to behave and act. You are correct that God’s grace is a freely given gift, and that one need not “genuflect like some medieval knight before the throne” to get it, but that’s not the point. The genuflection is an outward sign of the honor and worship we owe to God. We do so, not because God demands or needs it (He doesn’t), but because in doing so we signal our relationship to the one who created us, and in so signaling, something inside of us changes, however small and imperceptible it may be. Such gestures become, if we allow them, powerful outward reminders of who we are and what we value most (our relationship with God). Genuflection is not the only means of doing this, but it one means, and a means that the community shares in common. I think you’re the one who needs to mind your own business (namely your own relationship with God) and stop worrying about Cardinals and Bishops.
Padraig - theology teaches us how to love and what to love. Indeed, theology means “the study of God.” Since God is Love, true theology will not reveal anything against love.
A correction to my above comment—married priesthood should not be lumped under my comment. It, indeed, is a tradition and a discipline. The rest of them, including female deacons (a deaconess is not the same as a deacon), cannot be theologically justified (not to speak of what natural law says about several of them).
Quindlen did this to make a grand statement. In essence no difference from this article. The radiance of the grace of Christ happens every nano-second of every day. Do I need to genuflect like some medievil knight before the throne to get God’s grace… no/
Most people are not like this author. Most people just get tired and leave and don’t give a well reasoned theological decision. I am tired of every homily or article being about contraception or abortion or leaving the church. These are extremely negative topics, exactly like your article. All magazines like this one are like the catholic version of the National Enquirer. Who cares. You had deep vein thrombosis. So what. That’s life, get over it. Your a paid author for a national magazine.
Mind your own business what people want to do. Spread love not theology. That is what the Lord did and he had no cardinals or bishops to worry about.
To Rick,
Not only do all of the things you mentioned fail to be sustainable theologically, but they have caused the self implosion of almost all mainline protestant denominations. You shall know them by their fruits, indeed.
-Theophilus
I just entered the Church 2 years ago. I am always amazed when I read comments suggesting that the Church should throw open its windows, or get with the times or ordain woman or this or that or the other. It is strange because the Church is the mystical body of Christ. To say the Church should do this or that would be like standing at the foot of the cross and saying “oh Jesus, you really should have done this all differently and if you do send an advocate to guide us in truth, makes sure that it is contemporary truth and not that old infinate truth that was so cool for Moses but won’t seem so great when You come in Glory”
I’m not making any doctrinal statemens. I just don’t get all the complaining about how the Church is just not quite as good as it could be if only Jesus was God and would take our opinions more into account because we have proven over and over again how darn competent we are at saving ourselves thank you very much.
@ Tom R: “To say the continuing scandals of the hierarchy are faults of human nature implies that human nature, and not the Holy Spirit, is in control of the hierarchy. Otherwise, the Holy Spirit would inspire these men to behave less as sinners, if for nothing else than to prevent scandal with God’s church.”
Not really, Tom. This too was an issue with me before joining the Church, principally because I failed to understand the charism of infallibility as it pertains to the Magisterium as exercised by the Pope and the hierarchy. All the Holy Spirit guarantees is that when the Pope teaches on a matter of faith or morals, and that teaching is made ex cathedra and binding over the whole Church, then the Pope is prevented from speaking lies and falsehoods and passing them off as correct doctrine, and even then the infallibility attaches to the teaching, not to the man per se. The Pope’s exercise of Magisterial authority is infallible. His administrative actions, personal faith, even personal moral conduct are not protected under the charism. Another way of saying that is that the Pope is INFALLIBLE in the right exercise of the Magisterium, but not IMPECCABLE in his personal faith, thinking, or conduct. This goes for the rest of the hierarchy, as well.
While it may be tempting to ask “why” of the Holy Spirit when confronted with grave evil committed by members of the Church, including the hierarchy, we must remember that the Holy Spirit denies freedom of will in one’s personal conduct to no one, not even the Pope. And boy…have we had some bad popes over the centuries. Pope John XII (ca. 937-964 A.D.) comes to mind. And let’s not forget that Peter himself denied Christ three times and cut the ear off the High Priest’s servant when they came to arrest Jesus.
Now, some look at these horrific scandals (sex abuse, corruption, etc.) and would like to caste them in a the light of a referendum on the hierarchy. But these events rather strengthen my faith in the Holy Spirit and His Church, as they remind me that the teachings of the Church are immutable and stand apart and unthwarted by the bad behavior of those who would purport to practice the faith. As Frank Sheed once put it,
“We are not baptized into the hierarchy; do not receive the Cardinals sacramentally; will not spend an eternity in the beatific vision of the pope. Christ is the point. I, myself, admire the present pope (John Paul II), but even if I criticized him as harshly as some do, even if his successor proved to be as bad as some of those who have gone before, even if I find the church, as I have to live with it, a pain in the neck, I should still say that nothing a pope (or a priest) could do or say would make me wish to leave the church, although I might well wish that they would leave.”
When I read the comments about how the Church is doing it wrong, I have to ask myself if I believe that the Church is listening to the Holy Spirit, or if the commenter is. So far, I believe (and I have questioned my faith and Church teachings)that Jesus said it best, “the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church”.
6. Are you sure that when you are on your deathbed you will adamantly refuse a priest for confession and viaticum?
The Blessed Mother wasn’t a priest or a deacon. It’s not going to happen, ladies. We can serve the church as nuns and sisters. Jesus could have made Lazerus’s sisters Mary and Martha priests as well. He didn’t- His choice as He is God. Why isn’t that enough for you? If you were truly humble it would be. All the more reason for there never to be women priests or deacons (many of whom later become priests) because the type of women who would force their way into the priesthood would change other things about the church.
Quindlen has never been a defender of the faith. Her departure is a matter of her choice, and will not influence other Catholics, IMO.
That said, at some point one has to wonder if the hierarchy of the Church is truly inspired by the Holy Spirit, and this issue is causing me grave difficulty.
To say the continuing scandals of the hierarchy are faults of human nature implies that human nature, and not the Holy Spirit, is in control of the hierarchy. Otherwise, the Holy Spirit would inspire these men to behave less as sinners, if for nothing else than to prevent scandal with God’s church. More importantly, they would be inspired to set an example. While we are all sinners, wouldn’t one expect the Holy Spirit to keep an eye on the people selected for positions of power within the Church? Why not? If the argument is, “they can choose to accept or reject their calling,” then how are we to know when that occurs, and what choice has been made by whom? We’re just supposed to trust them? When our confessor turns out to be a child rapist, we’re just supposed to accept that he, like all sinners, made a bad choice? Why did the Holy Spirit allow us to confess our sins to this monster? “Oh, no, you were confessing to God, the priest is just a mediator”, is a truly ridiculous response, since he is supposed to be the representative of God himself in the confessional. This doesn’t have to trouble anyone else, but it certainly troubles me.
leaving the Catholic Church means leaving the sacraments—sacraments with real power, which are not available outside of the Church that Jesus founded
What about the Orthodox Churches? I was a member of the Serbian Orthodox Church for over a decade before I reverted back to the Catholic Church, and I certainly used the sacraments of Confession and Eucharist there. In fact, I grew to love and appreciate those sacraments far more than before I became Orthodox (I had been a poorly catechized Catholic). When I reverted back to Catholicism, I was so grateful for the years that I spent as an Orthodox Christian, because it gave me a better knowledge of Church history, as well as a love of the Psalms and the Mother of God.
This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it.
I think that John Chapter 6 sums this topic up the best. Many disciples left Jesus physically that day. Many Catholics leave Jesus sacramentally these days.
John Ch 6 is my only retort to Protestants and JW’s who approach me or knock on my door.
Upbeat Dad, I agree….big time.
“the spirit of Vatican II” My goodness. Worse words have never been uttered. I jest, of course (only barely), since that phrase has been the justification for many of the ridiculous things we see in some liturgies today. Our associate pastor at my parish is from Poland, and has some incredible insights into liturgy and the Church. His position (which I respect and agree with) is that Vatican II as determined by the councils and leadership of the Church never really took place in the US; what really happened was what the Church leaders *wanted* Vatican II to look like, all in “the spirit of Vatican II”. Sigh…
I just thought about this topic recently, and wondered how Eucharistic one’s faith really is if one ultimately decides to leave the Church. Bad things happen in individual parishes, and I can certainly understand one wanting to leave a particular parish and go to a different one. But to leave the Church entirely? One must ask, “do you really believe what the Church teaches about the Eucharist, that it really is Jesus, complete and entire, body, blood, soul, and divinity?” If you don’t, then you really aren’t leaving the Church, because you were never really Catholic to begin with…not really…not in your heart of hearts. And if you do believe it, then why would you ever even dream of leaving? To leave the Church under those circumstances really is to leave Christ…literally leave him at the altar where he waits for you. I don’t care how bad things get, if one truly has a deep faith rooted in the Eucharist, and one really and truly buys it…then WILD HORSES should not be able to drag you away. From this standpoint, maybe the sex abuse scandals are a good thing, and maybe all the strife over contraception and abortion and women’s ordination is a good thing. And maybe the atheist hate and public defections and government intrusions are all good things, because…at long last…we’re are going to see who is REALLY Catholic and who was just pretending.
Point On!!!Great article. Thanks for saying what I have been thinking for years.
@Beverley (9:08),
We are to trust Him.
Please do not think that we are second class citizens in the the Church merely because we cannot become priests or deacons.
Consider who Christ chose to be His priests - all men. I don’t get it (though I spend time reflecting on it), but I do trust the wisdom of God that was given to the Church to keep and hand down. It’s ok that we aren’t priests or deacons. For God chose *us* to bring new life into the world, literally giving of ourselves from the inside out for our families. A seed must die in order for the plant to grow, and so must our own selfishness if we are to have Life in Christ.
We are exactly who and where we need to be.
Peace to you, my dear sister in Christ. +
Beverly, yes, the “Gates of hell will never prevail against the Church”. Do you honestly believe, that God, through the Holy Spirit would let the leaders of the Church teach error (mislead us?) in regard to faith and morals, i.e. contraception, sexual sins, women priests,etc.? Regardless of the personal behavior of some in the Church, they have never taught error in these matters. What are we to do, you ask? First, your very claim “If Jesus were alive today would he recognize the Church?” shows your shallow understanding of Christianity. Jesus is alive today- he is physically alive in heaven, but you do realize that He is God, the second person of the Blessed Trinity don’t you? You don’t think He knows exactly what His Church is doing and that the Catholic Church is HIS Church and that the Magesterium is guided by the Holy Spirit and protected from teaching error to the faithful in regard to the faith and morals? After 68 years as a Catholic, is your knowledge of the Faith so limited? Be hurt and embarrassed by the behavior of some in the church, but not in the Church herself.
I love your articles and believe in the Catholic faith but I wish our leaders believed. I’ve watched their political moves for the past four years and it’s not pretty. Instead, I’ve seen the leaders throw the unborn under the bus for money by watching them protect their tax exempt status, or get universal healthcare with ‘abortion neutral’ language, and silence a right to life organization for political favoritism. I see little faith but instead politicians/businessmen running a business that makes billions through gov’t grants, business grants, and our tithe. For 54 years they’ve veiled the truth of contraception and the blood of the unborn are on their hands. Is there contrition? The bishops have compromised their faith for gov’t money and now are having to defend their beliefs. God is good and I pray the Church is being cleansed and strengthened in faith in God alone.
I will always be Catholic, have been for 68 years, but I am deeply hurt and embarrassed by my church. Women are second class citizens as we cannot be priests or deacons; priests are not allowed to marry (have known several good men who have left for that reason); there are many evils with pedophilia and the cover-ups and now the scandal leaked by the Pope’s butler. I often wonder if Jesus were alive today,if He would recognize the church. However, I claim the promise He made…“and the gates of hell will
not prevail against it”...even if that means the Pope and the Cardinals!! What are we to do??
Excellent article. Thank-you!
That is so sad. I suppose if my husband left me with my kids I would be bitter against God for a while too. There but for the Grace of God go I.
The is obsessed with pelvic issues because our culture is obsessed with unnatural pelvic actions.
The will be obsessed with whatever our culture is predominantly misunderstanding. I am sure back in the day Nero said that Catholics were obsessed with worshipping the One God and Arius said the Church was obsessed with the Jesus being God made Man.
The Church has always been progressive where She is to be and conservative where She is to be which is exactly what Tradition is.
In response to a couple of the comments on the Church “needing” to support contraception and women deacons:
Jesus’ love was free, total, faithful, and fruitful. The use of contraception is not total giving love because you are not willing to give all of yourself to one another and it is not fruitful love because you are not open to life. With women deacons, Jesus chose 12 men to follow him and carry out his message and teachings. And in Mt 19:12, Jesus teaches that there are those that choose not to marry and become eunuchs for the kingdom. Priests know the sacrifice they make when entering the priesthood to live a celebate lifestyle and to think that they do not understand sexuality is to be misunderstood.
Jennifer, thank you for your insight and I pray that all those that place their pride in front of true Catholic teaching will see the light before they seperate themselves from the fullness of Christianity. God bless!
Actually, statistically, at least in Australia, a Catholic priest is far less likely to abuse a child than a state school teacher is (to abuse a child.) He is however, far more likely to get huge media coverage.
I too have a strange blood clotting gene, which would have made the pill a severe health risk. Even so, many doctors tried to prescribe it when I was younger…how lucky am I!
I’ve been thinking a lot about the holocaust of Nazi Germany and comparing it to the current holocaust of abortion. Rationalization is definitely key in both circumstances. Anna Quindlen can go ahead and reduce it to an obsession with gynecology all she wants, but the truth is that the Church is exposing abortion for what it is.
Thoughtful article! It is just so sad that there is so much confusion in our world. People tend to hold on to their uneducated opinions and advertise them without trying to find out the truth. Thank you for trying to make people see and understand our Church, Jennifer! God bless!
Many years ago, I used to get Newsweek, and every other week Mrs.Quindlen was given space to sprout her attacks against God and His Church. It seems as though her husband left her with young children and the divorce left her bitter and very angry with God and His Church and she has never learned the lesson about forgiveness (I hope that she doesn’t say the Lord’s Prayer as God will honor her wishes). Her attack about the homosexual Priests is only one of many smoke screens that she is using as she can’t or won’t admit to what the real problem is. She, along with Rich Dykstra and Rick and the rest that ‘think’ as they do, need our prayers for their salvation and the right to get into Heaven, as they are only one breath from the gates of hell. +JMJ+
If one won’t listen to the Church, then listen to Ghandi: “Contraceptive methods are like putting a premium on vice. They make men and women reckless. Nature is relentless and will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws…If contraceptive methods become the order of the day nothing but moral degradation can be the result. As it is, man has sufficiently degraded woman for his lust, and contraception, no matter how well-meaning the advocates may be, will still further degrade her.”
I was once almost at the point of quitting the Church, as in the case of Quindlen, and for the same lame reasons. Fortunately, possibly due to the intercession of saints in heaven, and of course, because of the workings of the Holy Spirit, my conversion turned me back toward the Church, as Jennifer notes about herself. Praise God and pray for Anna, who will find herself in a sad, dark place if she follows our dissolute culture into the depths of selfishness and post-modern nihilism. Clever words in writing and homage to the self-ordained intelligentsia will not make her happy and fulfilled in the end.
.
I am proud to be an obedient and faithful Catholic - embracing this community has brought so many blessings unto me!
Poster “rick” said, “Since when the Hierarchy of the Church had a chance to stand up in the 30s it did not.”
That is false. Look up Mit brennender Sorge (an encyclical of Pope Pius XI from 1937) and Clemens August Graf von Galen (bishop of Munster) just for starters.
In RE tp Rich….
You are not correct about same-sex unions….
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/was-same-sex-marriage-a-christian-rite
Also - I am a married Catholic who uses NFP and know many other married couples who do the same. The fact is contraception is evil and only leads to sexual selfishness. A man should accept his wife completely - fertility and all!!! I’m not saying you need to have a dozen kids, but NFP is just as effective as artificial contraceptives - if not more effective. The RX companies would like you to think otherwise. You are being deceived.
“The turning point in our lives is when we stop seeking the God we want and start seeking the God who is.”
Jennifer - You are so wise and so blessed! God Bless You for your witness! Keep speaking and writing - the souls you will help to save are immeasurable!
People that leave go where? If they leave because they have found a more fulfilling spiritual life with another religion I can understand and agree with them. But if they leave for emptiness or nothing better then it sounds like an emotional decision.
The Church really is only as strong and inviting as the neighborhood parishes are. If they are unwelcoming and dysfunctional then, yes, people do leave for more nurturing churches.
Well I will remain and demand that the leadership repent, reform, renew and rededicate to the spirit of Vatican II.
Well when you come up with a doctrinally binding statement from the documents of Vatican II that the leadership isn’t currently following, let us know.
i have problems with the leadership of the church. They are doing great harm to the church. That being said i am not going to let the scribes and pharisees and the neocons drive me out of Christ’s church. It is after all His church, not the pope’s or the curia’s. I ran across a quote from Frederick Douglas which struck me. “Power never concedes without demand, it never has and it never will.” Well I will remain and demand that the leadership repent, reform, renew and rededicate to the spirit of Vatican II. I am convinced that the Holy Spirit today works through the body of Christ, the people of God.
Your articleis well written but like the author you ate writing a out you mistakenly site pedophilia. It was homosexuality that was the root cause. The victims were 15 or older, it was not an attraction of children. The percentage of priests accused 98 percent are falsely accused, the statistics are out there. As far as your subjects view on birth control, I am sure that her belief is something nurtured in this culture of death. Too bad she has gone to the dark side of life, but that is Satan’s plan.
“There is a pervasive sense in modern culture that whatever spiritual tradition places the fewest moral restrictions on its adherents is most likely to be right.” This is a straw-man argument. It is not about having fewer restrictions, but about restrictions that make sense. The proscription against contraception does not make sense—the rationale given for it is gobbledegook. The same goes for arguments forbidding women priests. It makes sense to forbid drunk driving; it makes sense to weigh down on consciences in respect of the poor, in respect of profligate expenditure on arms, in respect of disrespectful behaviour (yes—I am not from the US) towards the planet, polluting your environment, etc. But taking a pill to prevent overpopulation in the context of a committed marriage that is generally open to life! Give me a break!
Funny thing is that people leave the Church over contraception, abortion, and women’s ordination. So who is it again that is obsessed with “pelvic issues?”. They almost never leave over things like the Real Presence, the need for the sacraments. I guess that is the sad thing. They don’t understand those things at all because if they did, they would never leave. Never.
Rick,
you are very wrong. this article is fairly short but with footnotes so that you can do some research.
http://www.catholic.com/documents/how-pius-xii-protected-jews
“The Church is inspired by God. And the Church increasingly wants priests to be married and the qualifications for becoming a priest not regulated to one’s genitalia. The unelected Church administrators are fighting with the Church, and therefore with God.”
This is silly.
Jimmy Akin has previously refuted the baloney about the Church blessing same-sex unions and its bald reassertion here is yet another proof that progressives don’t have any good arguments, just noise.
Prayers for Anna Quindlen. I cannot imagine leaving the communion of Saints. Certainly, those who have gone before us witnessed the element of human weakness that infiltrated the Church. And, yet, were still able to see God’s hand steering the Church. She is probably quite bruised from all the pressure of the secular world. Thanks for your inspired response, Jennifer.
@Anne - Sadly, the last line isnt powerful at all. Since when the Hierarchy of the Church had a chance to stand up in the 30s it did not.
The Church is inspired by God. And the Church increasingly wants priests to be married and the qualifications for becoming a priest not regulated to one’s genitalia. The unelected Church administrators are fighting with the Church, and therefore with God.
For years Quindlen has used her position as a cradle Catholic to refute and undermine the reasonable teaching of the Catholic Church. Blinded by the veil of radical feminism she takes the position that because women have been discriminated inthe past by Church and state (no argument), they deserve the right to destroy innocent human beings . She will be happier outside the Church because the Church is the prime entity in America to defend the Human Rights of all human beings. A human being nurtured in its mothers womb has every right of a human being nurtured at its mothers breast.Science has proven the Church position.
Great article! Well said.
Rick, Please site your source for this comment: Gay People ought to again be able to have their commitment to each other blessed by the Church. In the 11th and 12th Century, the Church blessed such unions.
Your final line says it all: One day the life that the Catholic Church stands up for may be your own. Powerful!!!
Outstanding response Jennifer. Really well done! A prayer for Anna Quindlen’s soul is required. For me, the sadness heightens with those she may drag down with her, or for those she may drag down even further than they were before. Thanks, Jennifer, and may our Lord bless you, your loved ones, and those who read your response with grace upon grace to stand steadfast in the faith.
In my humble opinion, the Church needs input from the laity on a higher level. It also needs to “open the window” wider and allow for variety in service to the Church. Women should be allowed to become Permanent Deacons. They would be a big help to the Church, and it would be nothing new, since the Church had female Deacons at one time. Diocean Priests should be given the option of marrying before ordination. Gay People ought to again be able to have their commitment to each other blessed by the Church. In the 11th and 12th Century, the Church blessed such unions.
The Church needs to take a realistic stand on Contraception! Most Catholics who are married use Contraception. The only other alternative is abortion!
She’s a gifted writer
Meh. Another priestette from the Cathedral of Democracy making a loud, public defection.
Join the Discussion
We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words. By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines. Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words. Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.
Comments are no longer being accepted on this article.