Why do people enjoy attacking the Catholic church so much

[linwood]

Your profile reads....Religion?--None!

But you sure seem to be ringing the Protestant's "bell".

I don`t mean to, many of the things I`ve mentioned the Protestants also had a hand in.
It`s just that the Protestants sects have divided so many times they really can`t be spoken of as a single entity.

Thanks.

 

[Scott1]

Hello all!

Well, I would much rather see this thread die out, but it seems that I can't stay away.

Where are ya Gunga, Dave, logos, etc?????

I just want to jump on and try to clear one thing up. The is generally a communication problem when Catholic try to convey the history of the Church.

Abortion. Celebrate priests.

What I believe he is trying to convey is that in 2,000 years the Catholic Church has never tought something to be true (as it related to faith and morals and the Gospel of Christ)in the past and where the new teaching is the OPPOSITE of what the previous teaching was. The Church (at least today) does not claim to have ALL truth. The fullness of all revealed truth rests in the Catholic Church , but the Gospel and our path to salvation is a continuing process of God revealing truth to us throughout history.

There is a big difference between changing the customs and practices of the Church and changing something that belongs in the deposit of faith (unchangable).

Well my friend, I can show you that official Catholic teaching about abortion has remained in defense of life for the better part of the last 2,000 years.... that being said, abortion in not part of the deposit of faith (as far as I know)..... but I'll show you some proof anyhow:

The Didache

"The second commandment of the teaching: You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not seduce boys. You shall not commit fornication. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use potions. You shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child" (Didache 2:1–2 [A.D. 70]).

The Letter of Barnabas

"The way of light, then, is as follows. If anyone desires to travel to the appointed place, he must be zealous in his works. The knowledge, therefore, which is given to us for the purpose of walking in this way, is the following. . . . Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring abortion; nor, again, shalt thou destroy it after it is born" (Letter of Barnabas 19 [A.D. 74]).

Priestly celibacy is hardly part of the deposit of faith. There are married Catholic priests! A strongly contested issue that took many form over the years? Yes.... but hardly evidence of Catholic doctrinal flip flops.

 

[Pah]

Hello all!

...
What I believe he is trying to convey is that in 2,000 years the Catholic Church has never tought something to be true (as it related to faith and morals and the Gospel of Christ)in the past and where the new teaching is the OPPOSITE of what the previous teaching was. The Church (at least today) does not claim to have ALL truth. The fullness of all revealed truth rests in the Catholic Church , but the Gospel and our path to salvation is a continuing process of God revealing truth to us throughout history.

I understand that truth in the Catholic Church has four sources, the Bible being one of them, and the tradition as espoused by the early church fathers being another. It is true, as you quoted from some of the early documents, that abortion was initially considered the grave sin of murder. But it is equally true that beginning with St. Augustine in the 5th Century and continuing through St Aquinas in the 13th Century abortion was not considered murder until after "quickening" of the fetus. This view change again in 1588 in a bull by Pope Sixtus V - the "Effraenatam". Pope Gregory XIV revoked that bull in 1591 and reverted to the standard of "quickening. "Simultaneous animation" became the standard in the 17th Century. Pope Pius IX reversed this stance by dropping the disctintion of "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus" in 1869. The Church had enjoyed a certain tolerance for abortion for over 14 Centuries.
Source: http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm

There is a big difference between changing the customs and practices of the Church and changing something that belongs in the deposit of faith (unchangable).

I don't know if this statement is affected by the material I've posted above

Priestly celibacy is hardly part of the deposit of faith. There are married Catholic priests! A strongly contested issue that took many form over the years? Yes.... but hardly evidence of Catholic doctrinal flip flops.

I understand that a third source of truth for the Church lies in the bulls promolgated from the Pope. Within my lifetime, there has been such a document re-affirming celebracy for the priesthood. But I'm fairly certain the Bible has spoken of married Bishops. in several places of the New Testament.

-pah-

 

[Scott1]

I don't know if this statement is affected by the material I've posted above

A Pope or Council would have to come out and say "abortion is not a sin and is embraced by God as pleasing to Him" for it to be contrary to what has been tought all along.

The "quickening" or the imputation of a soul into a new born is quite semantic, in my opinion.... and I am glad that the Church finally has the teaching right.

I understand that a third source of truth for the Church lies in the bulls promolgated from the Pope.

Well, to be acurate... there are only two: the Bible and Tradition. The "bulls" of past and future Popes do carry some hefty weight, but I actually am not sure of what or when the Pope can speak "ex cathedra" with the grace of infalliblitiy...... I just know that not every papal communication is regarded as such.

For instance: The papal letter sent to Luther by Prierias (the private theologian of Pope Leo X) that described him as "a leper and loathsome fellow.... a dog and the son of a *****, born to bite and snap at the sky with his doggish mouth" :tsk: That kind of message would get a poster banned from this site!

Within my lifetime, there has been such a document re-affirming celebracy for the priesthood. But I'm fairly certain the Bible has spoken of married Bishops. in several places of the New Testament.

Quite right. In fact the Apostle Peter was married! A celibate Priest is something that the Church teaches is the ideal situation... to give ones self totally to a task is a beautiful thing to me.

I guess you missed that there are married Roman Catholic Priests in the Church TODAY..... I met one the other day.... two kids as well. My point is that it is not defined as an absolute and certainly not something defined in the deposit of faith.

Scott

 

[HelpMe]

This is all common misconceptions about the Catholic faith.
for instance, 1. saints are not idols, they are examples.

why have imperfect examples when you were given a perfect example?confession isn't 'scripturally' supposed to be directed toward man.

Great post precept, and i agree with michelle's last sentence, bandgeek, soultype01, linwood, lady lazarus, and PAH.

The prayers are a request for them to intercede for us on Christ's behalf or to bring a petition or prayer to Christ.

Since, according to scripture 'jesus' is to be our mediator between us and his father, and no other mediator is ever scripturally called out, catholics are called on this action.

The Church (at least today) does not claim to have ALL truth.

How can this be so with christ on earth?

 

[linwood]

This is all common misconceptions about the Catholic faith.
for instance, 1. saints are not idols, they are examples.

I would like to touch on this statement also.
Saints are perhaps not supposed to be idols but they are treated as such by most if not all Catholics I know.
In fact even I have a St. Christopher medallion hanging in my car.
The use of the image of a Saint in this manner is obviously idolization.
It`s a charm, a totem, an amulet..an idol.
This amulet is a "Good Luck" charm for travelers.
The prayer I quoted earlier..

"St. Anthony ..St.Anthony..
Please come around..
Somethings been lost..
And cannot be found."

Is a plea for direct help from this saint to give aid in finding a lost item.
It is not a message sent to God through this saint.
It is a direct prayer to the saint himself.

These examples are obviously not derived from the Catholic canon yet they are well established within the culture of Catholicism.
Somewhere, sometime, somehow, someone made this acceptable

 

[Pah]

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5415
is a thread about the abuses of the Catholic Church within our country's history.

-pah-

 

[Scott1]

It is a direct prayer to the saint himself.

I know it's hard to understand, but you are missing the point.... there are Catholics all over the world who never pray to Saints.... it's not a "requirement" of the faith. As far as your example.... a direct prayer to the saint himself has no power without God.... the saint has no power without God.... we recognize only the divine goodness in those people, not their humanity that somehow can answer our prayers. You are getting caught up in some sort of chain of command issues with the prayers and missing the point that it is out of love and respect for what God can do in the lives of people who trust in Him that is the true message of Saints.

Since, according to scripture 'jesus' is to be our mediator between us and his father, and no other mediator is ever scripturally called out, catholics are called on this action.

Welcome back. I don't know what "called on this action" means.... but.... you seem to be confused about what the word mediator means.
The Bible tells us to pray for each other.... how can we say a prayer to God for someone else if Jesus is the ONLY mediator as you seem to be defining the word? You can't.

How can this be so with christ on earth?

Who claims to be Christ on earth? The Church is the Bride of Christ.... the Pope is the visible head of the Church on earth..... I don't know what you are trying to ask or infer by this statement...???

Again, welcome back.
Scott

 

[linwood]

I know it's hard to understand, but you are missing the point.... there are Catholics all over the world who never pray to Saints.... it's not a "requirement" of the faith.

I do understand that Scott but my point is it doesn`t matter in the grand scheme of things because whether or not it is a requirement of faith or even a dictated part of canon or not it is still an ingrained part of the faith for many many many Catholics.

The fact that you are aware of the examples I`ve given is proof that it is common knowledge within the Catholic culture.

It is for good or bad, right or wrong,like it or not, a part of your faith/religion.

It may seem at times that I am anti-God or anti-Jesus but nothing could be further from the truth.
My problem with all the god stuff isn`t the gods themselves it`s the misunderstandings and misrepresentations that have permeated all faiths that cause divisions and intolerence between people.

This is just one example of a misunderstanding that has become so ingrained within one religions culture that it is now a part of it.

This one isn`t particularly intolerent but it is a very plain simple example of the process involved which does indeed cause intolerence when discussing different examples.

 

[john1980]

I know there must be many different motivations, I am just curious why this is the last great, accepted predjudice.

first of all its a waste of time asking nbsp question if you clame to be christains claim we come to this type of question because we dont read the word of god with the wisdom of god i expect MARY should be give repect since she was a chosen by god to fullfill gods purpose (its very difficult to expect the offer to carry a baby before marriage) so i respect here for her great submission to the plan of god there ends the whole matter as you read in the BIBLE (one incidentnbspcoded as )WHO EVER DOES MY FARHER WILL IS MY BROTHER AND SISITER AND ETC ) I DONTnbspNT nbspRITE THE VERSE WHERE IT IS I WHANT YOU TO FIND THIS VERSE WHERE IT IS AND READ IT WITH ASKING GOD THE WISDOM TO UNDERSTAND THIS VERSE

other thing is that our god is a jelouse he hates idol worship so my dear friend what are you doing ? the same thing idol worship MARY is dead she also going to judged by jesus christ so as we are going to be so its not the point of attacking but its the point of the truth dont get confused inbspu are not able to find the answer BETTER OFEN THE nbsptionary nbspHE WORD OF GOD BIBLE A LEARN WHAT DOES THIS TRUTH SAYS) READ THE TRUTH AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE &nbnbsp/HP> ARE YOU SAVED BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST?

 

[chuck010342]

And you would know this for sure by the postmark on the postcard he sent you that said,'Having a lovely time, wish you were here. Love, God'?

I know this for sure becuase I have faith in the bible and in faith In God because he would not lie to me

 

[The Voice of Reason]

first of all its a waste of time asking nbsp question if you clame to be christains claim we come to this type of question because we dont read the word of god with the wisdom of god i expect MARY should be give repect since she was a chosen by god to fullfill gods purpose (its very difficult to expect the offer to carry a baby before marriage) so i respect here for her great submission to the plan of god there ends the whole matter as you read in the BIBLE (one incidentnbspcoded as )WHO EVER DOES MY FARHER WILL IS MY BROTHER AND SISITER AND ETC ) I DONTnbspNT nbspRITE THE VERSE WHERE IT IS I WHANT YOU TO FIND THIS VERSE WHERE IT IS AND READ IT WITH ASKING GOD THE WISDOM TO UNDERSTAND THIS VERSE

other thing is that our god is a jelouse he hates idol worship so my dear friend what are you doing ? the same thing idol worship MARY is dead she also going to judged by jesus christ so as we are going to be so its not the point of attacking but its the point of the truth dont get confused inbspu are not able to find the answer BETTER OFEN THE nbsptionary nbspHE WORD OF GOD BIBLE A LEARN WHAT DOES THIS TRUTH SAYS) READ THE TRUTH AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE &nbnbsp/HP> ARE YOU SAVED BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST?

Two questions:
1) What does nbsp mean and how is it relevant?
2) What in the heck does this post mean? This is the second post I've read that completely ignores the rules of capitalization and punctuation. Without the use of these items, this post is almost illegible. That is hard to do with a word processor, but clearly, this post accomplished it.

Confused,
TVOR

 

[Scott1]

it is still an ingrained part of the faith for many many many Catholics.

I'll concede that fact, but you still have yet to come close to explaining why you think this is a bad thing.

My problem with all the god stuff isn`t the gods themselves it`s the misunderstandings and misrepresentations that have permeated all faiths that cause divisions and intolerence between people.

I agree that this is a bad example if you are trying to prove this point, but do you expect me to believe that your problem with the Catholic faith is members lack of understanding?
I'm still confused.... it sounds like if somehow I made every Catholic in the world understand the true meaning of our faith, you would no longer have a problem with the RCC.... yes?

 

[SoulTYPE]

Two questions:
1) What does nbsp mean and how is it relevant?
TVOR

  is actually a HTML code, used to put a spce in betwwen certain items on the page. :149:

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Thanks Soultype. I learn something new every day on this site.

TVOR

 

[Iti oj]

Muslims get attacked for terrorism because of 911, Catholics get picked on because of all the sex scandals, and jew get picked on because they started it .

 

[Pegg]

a very terrible history tends to give one a bad reputation.

 

[michaelsherlock]

I know there must be many different motivations, I am just curious why this is the last great, accepted predjudice.

Because we know that Catholics like to suffer!

 

[uss_bigd]

There is a difference between an attack an telling the truth! sometimes the truth hurts.

 

[obi one]

I know there must be many different motivations, I am just curious why this is the last great, accepted predjudice.

You have to admit, that pointing out problems with the Roman Church is just too easy. Not to say that many of the same problems don't exist with her protestant daughters, but her history is so bad as to make you wonder what people are thinking.

If it wasn't for lack of birth control, resulting in endoctrination of more children, and ensnaring new members through marriage, I can't imagine how the church could have survived. No one, except a small percentage of entrenched Catholics really believe the doctrine that the Pope is "Christ on earth". A history of torturing, confiscating property, and then burning your victims, whether dead or alive, doesn't add up to a solid track record of having good fruit. The Lutheran church may be as rich as the Catholic church, but they don't flaunt their wealth and political power, plus their members seem to be better off financially, whereas the majority of Catholics seem to be poor, and receive little support from the church.

It is not that I have anything against Catholics. My whole family considers themselves Catholic, in that they go to church on Easter, and are buried by a priest, excepting one sister, who decided to join a fundamentalist church. Inititally she was a Catholic's Catholic, except by getting too close, it let her see too many flaws.

The main point is that the Roman Catholic Church is the mother church. The others may accept a lot of her doctrines, canon, dogma, creeds, etc., but you can't address the flaws of thousands of individual sects. I can see were people think they are too invested in time, money , and false hope in false dogmas to change, but let us get real. Just look at your leaders, and decide if that is good as it gets. Individuals may follow the teachings of Yeshua, but the fundamental teachings of their churches, does not.