Catholic Confusion ,or, Who are the Faithful

I've seen the spiritual awakening in the RCC that's been happening over the last few years and, while I'm not in that group, I think it's great. As a former Catholic, I can tell you that one of the biggest problems, not just in Catholic pews, not even Baptist pews, are the amount of people who are are not faithful to their faith.

That is one of the reasons that I feel we need to serve the needs of our own church community before we can successfully reach out to others. The hair on my back stands up whe my local churchgoers badmouth the Lutheran church down the street, all the while turning a blind eye to our own shortcomings. That is what I think Jesus means when he told us clean our own eyes before we clean our neighbor's eyes.

 

Pslam,

Could you please point me to where this letter was obtained? Thanks!

God bless,

Grant

 

Of course, rather than give us this person's address so that we can help him (her?) out, you will just gleefully post this for us to see and to try to prove that the Catholic Faith is not worth a plugged nickel, right?

If you go through the history of the Church, both in the East and the West, you will find times of incredible sprituality, and you will find time of corruption so bad that they spawned a rebellion called the Reformation. This is to be expected of a living, breathing organism which is made up of SINNERS!!

And it started in the very first century. Peter acted like a hypocrite and Paul called him on it. The Corinthian parish was filled with sectarianism and had a man living in scandalous sin with his mother in law.

In the sixth century, ALL the bishops of the Eastern Church were Arian heretics. Only St. Athanasius and the pope were faithful to the truth of Christ's divinity.

Did any of these or the many other problems in the Church make the Church itself change ontologically? No. The Church is always the Bride of Christ, is always the kingdom of God, is always the Body of Christ and proclaimer of the Good News. Just as a tumor in your lungs does not change the ontology of your lungs, neither does the presence of sinners or sin change the ontology of the Church.

We will get past this time, just as we did with the rebels of the Reformation and the scandals in the Church at that time. The Holy Spirit will move when it pleases Him and not a second sooner. It is the call of all the faithful to remain faithful and pray for the need changes to take place.

 

You could start by explaining Ree's questions for Ps104_33 and myself. Ree is not the only one who finds it rather suspicious that this organization which is supposed to bring clarity and unity instead brings confusion.

 

At this point we don't even know if "Ree" actually exists or if this is just some made up letter that was written by some nameless anti-Catholic.

BTW, it will be interesting to see if Psalm actually participates in this thread or if this is just another anti-Catholic hit and run.

 

Why don't you stop with the balogna? The Catholic Church has a very CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS position. It is called the CATHOLIC CATECHISM. It is thorough enough that it goes to over 700 pages with copious notes, footnotes, and scriptural references to explain to those WHO WANT TO KNOW, exactly what the Catholic position is on any given subject.

Those who object to the Church's teachings in the Catechism, teach their own brand of theology, stir up trouble, and ordain their own heretical women and sodomite priests and bishops are NOT CATHOLICS.

I cannot say that strongly enough.

THEY ARE NOT CATHOLIC!!!

And they should do the Church a favor and have the moral and intellectual decency to LEAVE the Church and join y'all Prots who HATE THE CHURCH ANYWAY!!!

The Catholic (universal) Faith is: "That which has been taught everywhere, at everytime, and in everyplace." (St. Vincent of Lerins). A Catholic is one who subscribes to this universal faith. If the people who are confusing Ree do not subscribe, they are not Catholic. Once Ree figures this out, he will be less confused. And once he realizes that there are traitors in the Church, who will no doubt be dealt with severely at the Judgement Seat of Christ, he will understand.

Bill Clinton and his cronies sold our secrets to the Chi-Coms for election $$$. Does that make America less American because we had a traitor in the White House? A true American is one for whom the Constitution is the last word. Those who pervert it are really not Americans and should go to Red China (are you listening Bill and Algore?) where they would no doubt be happy.

 

Look to the offical teachings of the Church.

Not really all that confusing or difficult is it now?

Ron

 

Will Muslims and Jews be saved according to the Catholic church?

http://aomin.org/YouTell.html

 

1. So you didn't even read the 'letter' at all then? Official teachings that contradict, books endorsed by rome which are divergent from the 'truth' that rome speaks of. Ok...don't address that problem.

2. Can a non-catholic get to heaven? Hmm...seems this has changed over time and people disagree on this. That's ok..still not confusing right?

3. Evangelize to the jews? Muslims? Non-catholics? Hmm...seems some think yes, some think no. Which is it? What does the church teach? Oh, muslims don't need christ (Catechism)? Jews don't either (Bishops decree)?

<sarcasm>Anyway..it all is soooo clear now. Thanks for correcting all of us nonthinking, dull witted, confused and misguided non-catholics. </sarcasm>

jason

 

At the Catholic Book store in my town. I ask the lady who runs it "Why don't you carry the CCC?". She said "You need a lawyer to understand it". So she showed me the Baltimore Catchesim and told me "This is made by bishops...and it is easier to understand". On the other side, my mother who is a devout RC, told me that she doesn't agree with the Baltimore Catchesim, there are many errors, and it is not an official RC document.

Who should I trust, an e-opoligist who says it is "very CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS" or a lady who runs the Catholic Book store? It seems too me that shw would be more knowledgeable about RC documents.

Who is right the lady at the Catholic Book store says you need a lawyer to interpret the CCC or an e-opoligist?

Was my mother right that the Baltimore Catchesim is not official?

Another note, my Father ,who is also a devout RC, told me that the Church was wrong to say Mary can dispense graces. He is right on that!

Another note: What is an "Anti-Catholic"? My mother told me it is a person who tells lies about the Church. Should I believe my mother or an e-opoligist who says anyone who speaks against the "Chruch" is Anti-Catholic?

 

Each of these has been (and will again, no doubt) addressed in other threads.

Short of writing a book, how is any person to answer the veeeerrrry loooooonnnng original post to your satisfaction? So many issues were raised so as to make it impossible to your satisfacton.

BTW, the answer CatholicConvert gave is the best: rely upon true Catholic sources, not some random Catholic who may or may not know what they are talking about.

And yes, it is quite clear to me. There is no change or contradiction.

 

Your mother..., your father..., some lady in a bookstore...

In as much as the Catechism of the Catholic Church is readily available on-line, you really have no excuse for your lack of reliable sources for the true teachings of the Church.

Why rely upon someone else's representations concerning how confusing the Catechism is when you can very easily go to it yourself?

Ron

 

CCC 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."

It is clear to me that the CCC says that faith IN Christ is not necessary for salvation. Faith of Abraham, and they adore one, merciful God. Muslims don't believe in the Trinity but they do believe in One God.

 

What is the context of the above paragraph?

Have you weighed this within the context of infallible ignorance?

And apparently, I was right. The subject of the original post was, "I can't tell what is Catholic teaching." Now it will be a series of questions on a variety of topics, merely with the intent of creating an illusion of confusion.

If you would like to discuss Muslims and salvation, great. Or will you momentarily be switching the topic to another "confusion"?

Ron

 

I've already addressed this issue in depth.

Who did Christ die for? Everyone. Everyone includes the Muslims. It also included "Christians" who only carry that name because it makes their family happy, but have no relationship with Jesus.

These people are included in the "plan for salvation," that is, God's plan to save the whole world through His only Son, Jesus Christ. We're all a part of that plan. It STILL takes a response of faith from us to achieve that gift of salvation. That doesn't mean we weren't in His plan.

Why is this in the Catechism? Most likely because Muslims are on the right track, and simply haven't found the goal (Jesus) yet. We should pray for all Muslims that their eyes might be fully open to the love of Christ. Unfortunately, those who hate the Church use this as a pathetic example to attack her. Could it have been worded better? Based on your responses, most definitely. Does that make the true meaning void? No.

Now move on.

 

I see. So I'm supposed to discuss these books....OF WHICH I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE. Exactly how can I defend a blind accusation with no information? What book am I supposed to talk about with you, here, Jason? You're condeming the Church based on a virtually anonymous letter (that has yet to be sourced for validation) that speaks of pure ambiguity. I have very little to go on. Heck, you're second question wasn't even addressed in the letter!!!!

Let's beat the dead horse until he turns into topsoil, eh? We are you bringing this up again, when we've explained it to you and you still don't get it? I'm so sorry you aren't satisfied with our answers, but they HAVE been provided. It's like attacking a deaf person because he can't hear; it's not MY fault you don't understand.

More beating of a dead horse. Read my reply before this one, something I've addressed in LENGTH in previous posts which you no doubt read. And the whole Jewish-reachout thing was also addressed and resolved in a previous post. That letter was written by a COMMITTEE, and is not official Church teaching. If it ain't in the Catechism, the Church don't teach it.

You desire perpetual confusion. These are all issues Catholics have addressed in length, and you conveniently forget about them OVER AND OVER AND OVER again so that you can make us out to be con artists. Cute.

 

Why is Islam singled out? It seems to be suggesting that a devote Muslim will be saved on the basis that it claims that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. This is the impression which we get when we read the statement, if that's not what you think it says, then it's not particular clear but instead it is a bit confusing.

 

You should ask Nimrod. He is the one who brought it up, Not GraceSaves.

Nimrod is the one who selected the particular paragraph to quote. That is why I asked for context.

Ron

 

I'll ask you to reread my statement, as I just addressed that issue. Muslims acknowledge God the Father; they're already part of the way to the truth. It's an attempt to show them that we consider them separated brethren (by our belief in Christ and their lack of belief in Him) and hope that they will come to know God's salvation. In this same section in the CCC you'll find statements about Judaism and other religions. Of course it's "singled out" here because it was taken out without the context of the entire section of the CCC.

Frankly, I just told you that it's NOT saying what you're claiming to read into it. Thus, I can only conclude that you don't care for my answer, and will continue to read into it falsely. What am I to do? You have the answer; that's what the Catholic Church teaches. Out of context, it's confusing. In context, and with my answer, it should no longer be confusing.

Okay?