Am Christian/Catholic?? Opinions?

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 12:38am #1

Just wondering am I still Catholic even though i dont attend mass? i consider myself religious but really dont see what going to listen to s**t has to do with spirituality! i believe in god etc..

Any comments?

yessam · 18-02-2010 12:47am

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

Just wondering am I still Catholic even though i dont attend mass? i consider myself religious but really dont see what going to listen to s**t has to do with spirituality! i believe in god etc..

Any comments?

you are probably still catcholic but you are not a practicing catcholic. you said you are religious, how do you practice it, maybe it is a different religion your practicing

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 12:58am

yessam wrote: »

you are probably still catcholic but you are not a practicing catcholic. you said you are religious, how do you practice it, maybe it is a different religion your practicing

id pray but not too regularly! id participate in lent, funerals etc....

prinz · 18-02-2010 10:11am

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

i consider myself religious but really dont see what going to listen to s**t has to do with spirituality!

You know that s**t you don't think has anything to do with spirituality?..... that's Catholicism.

Xluna · 18-02-2010 10:20am

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

Just wondering am I still Catholic even though i dont attend mass? i consider myself religious but really dont see what going to listen to s**t has to do with spirituality! i believe in god etc..

Any comments?

Non denominational Christian.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 10:38am

prinz wrote: »

You know that s**t you don't think has anything to do with spirituality?..... that's Catholicism.

haha. sorry if i offended you but seriously what has god got to do with things that happened 2000 years ago! like wit human nature its blatently obvious that you can not preserve stories that long!

and then the churchs' view on evolution and the like.... f**k sake

and homosexuality?? all just sh*t really!!

another debate i supppose.

maybe i should talk to a priest!! ha

Xluna · 18-02-2010 10:48am

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

haha. sorry if i offended you but seriously what has god got to do with things that happened 2000 years ago! like wit human nature its blatently obvious that you can not preserve stories that long!

and then the churchs' view on evolution and the like.... f**k sake

and homosexuality?? all just sh*t really!!

another debate i supppose.

maybe i should talk to a priest!! ha

Well if it's the Judeo Christian God you believe in then what's alleged to have happened 2000 years has a lot to do with it. The Catholic church actually does support evolution,though tolerating homosexual relations is another matter. If it's just some devine creator you believe in than that would make you a Deist.

Tea 1000 · 18-02-2010 10:54am

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

haha. sorry if i offended you but seriously what has god got to do with things that happened 2000 years ago!

Everything really, from a Catholic point of view.

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

and then the churchs' view on evolution and the like.... f**k sake

You're obviously not aware about the Catholic view on evolution... unless of course you think evolution is all nonsense, which is the only way to validate your remark.

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

maybe i should talk to a priest!! ha

No point, you're not Catholic based on your posts here. Not even Christian either. I would say that you're a theist, based on your posts alone. If you don't like religion you don't have to be part of one.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 11:00am

Xluna wrote: »

Well if it's the Judeo Christian God you believe in then what's alleged to have happened 2000 years has a lot to do with it. The Catholic church actually does support evolution,though tolerating homosexual relations is another matter. If it's just some devine creator you believe in than that would make you a Deist.

ya maybe i odnt see the point in the stories because of the corruption in the church?? like a 2 priests in my parish driving big brand neew cars! fair enough they can use their money but dont they give out to me when they took a vow of poverty!

i just see the church as a money making racket and to be honest id prob leave it officially on that "count me out" site but wannna stay for wedding funeral etc.... if the church gets money off me etc then ill get something out of them!!

Deist????

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 11:12am

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Everything really, from a Catholic point of view.

You're obviously not aware about the Catholic view on evolution... unless of course you think evolution is all nonsense, which is the only way to validate your remark.

Right sorry. theres a priest in my class in school(long story, came back to do the LC)

He got into a big debate with our biology teacher about adam and eve being real and that he couldnt believe the teacher was taken in by the whole darwin thing. he can be very touchy!

No point, you're not Catholic based on your posts here. Not even Christian either. I would say that you're a theist, based on your posts alone. If you don't like religion you don't have to be part of one.

fair enough! not overly bothered. i believe in a god but have my own views on it

prinz · 18-02-2010 11:17am

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

haha. sorry if i offended you

It takes more than that to offend me.

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

....but seriously what has god got to do with things that happened 2000 years ago!

...presumably the same that God has to do with things now, are you now going back on your belief in God?

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

...like wit human nature its blatently obvious that you can not preserve stories that long!

Apparently you can.

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

...and then the churchs' view on evolution and the like.... f**k sake

Care to expand on what you think the Church's view on evolution is?

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

ya maybe i odnt see the point in the stories because of the corruption in the church?? like a 2 priests in my parish driving big brand neew cars! fair enough they can use their money but dont they give out to me when they took a vow of poverty!

Maybe they won some cash in the lotto? See this fyi. Particularly the one about diocesan priests and the vow of poverty...

http://www.sandyfordparish.org/UPLOADS/vocation_questions_2.pdf

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

i just see the church as a money making racket and to be honest id prob leave it officially on that "count me out" site but wannna stay for wedding funeral etc.... if the church gets money off me etc then ill get something out of them!!

So you want to corrupt the Church more?

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 11:32am

Maybe they won some cash in the lotto? See this fyi. Particularly the one about diocesan priests and the vow of poverty...

http://www.sandyfordparish.org/UPLOADS/vocation_questions_2.pdf

So you want to corrupt the Church more?

Great, in that case ignore what i said! im off to join the seminary! theres some money in it....

ill get stoned for that anyway!!

i suppose at the end of the day im very ignorant on the matter! suppose its lack of interest!!

Stephentlig · 18-02-2010 12:22pm

I've been through this debate before with a Catholic professor of science, and I dont wanna go into another one, so this is gonna be my only post on the matter. the Catholic Church does not accept the theory of evolution, it is neither in Tradition or sacred Scripture. To ask more questions you can consult John Salza concerning this subject ( Catholic apologist ) at www.scripturecatholic.com

To the OP, for some reason I cannot help but think your ( which is new to me ) a troll and have come here just to spark debate on certain things.

Your gonna have to accept the view that God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve if you wanna remain Catholic, the Catholic churches teaching in the Cathechism on homosexuality can be found in your local Veritas or Christian shop.its not that expensive, about 7 to 10 euros. after reading it if you cannot accept all the infallible doctrines within it, then your not Catholic.

what do you mean by listening to s**t? if its homilys then I must agree I've heard some liquid S..H..etc etc from the pulpit in my day, and not every priests homily is as good as the next, but he is still trying and he or she will always have my respect as I wouldnt consider myself to be able to do any better than them.

You have lost interest, this happens us all, even the greatest of Saints lost interest at times, but with the help of God and their co-operation with him they got through it. My suggestion to you is to go and practice the Sacraments, form a relationship with Christ, but nobody is asking you to do this all in one go, take it step by step, at your own pace and allow to the Holy Spirit to lead you. Pick up an interesting spiritual novel, such as ''the way of a pilgrim'' http://www.amazon.ca/Way-Pilgrim-Walter-J-Ciszek/dp/0385468148

Read a passage of the Gospel once a day whilst reading the novel along with one Hail Mary when you finish it all and take it from there.

Ask God every day to lead you to him according to his will etc etc.

again dont overload your self, if what I have said is too much for you, then just take it at your own pace, step by step.

I play the guitar, and sometimes I get disinterested in it and dont play it for months, I even consider giving it up and going on to some other instrument, but soon, my love for the guitar and playing it is soon rekindled and I understand that I'll always be a guitarist whether I like it or not :pac: haha.

God bless and take care
Stephen

Xluna · 18-02-2010 12:31pm

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

Deist????

A person who believes in a divine creator,a supreme being,but does not presume to know said creators intent nor expects the Deity to intervene in personal human affairs.

kelly1 · 18-02-2010 12:45pm

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

Just wondering am I still Catholic even though i dont attend mass? i consider myself religious but really dont see what going to listen to s**t has to do with spirituality! i believe in god etc..

Do you think the word of God (bible readings) is s**t!? Do you want to be entertained at Mass or do you want to worship God!?

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

haha. sorry if i offended you but seriously what has god got to do with things that happened 2000 years ago! like wit human nature its blatently obvious that you can not preserve stories that long!

Actually it can be proven that bible texts have changed very, very little since they were first written because of the high degree of agreement between ancient manuscripts.

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

and then the churchs' view on evolution and the like.... f**k sake

You really should check these things out for yourself. The Church does accept evolution and other scientific discoveries.

prinz · 18-02-2010 12:57pm

Stephentlig wrote: »

I've been through this debate before with a Catholic professor of science, and I dont wanna go into another one, so this is gonna be my only post on the matter. the Catholic Church does not accept the theory of evolution, it is neither in Tradition or sacred Scripture.

Perhaps you should check Pope Piux XII's encyclical Humani Generis or

We cannot say: creation or evolution, inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God, which we just heard, does not in fact explain how human persons come to be but rather what they are. It explains their inmost origin and casts light on the project that they are. And, vice versa, the theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so doing it cannot explain where the 'project' of human persons comes from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complementary -- rather than mutually exclusive -- realities.
– Cardinal Ratzinger

or

In an October 22, 1996, address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope John Paul II updated the Church's position to accept evolution of the human body:
"In his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII has already affirmed that there is no conflict between evolution and the doctrine of the faith regarding man and his vocation, provided that we do not lose sight of certain fixed points....Today, more than a half-century after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies – which was neither planned nor sought – constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution#cite_note-0

Stephentlig · 18-02-2010 1:14pm

prinz wrote: »

Perhaps you should check Pope Piux XII's encyclical Humani Generis or

or

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution#cite_note-0

Yes I have check Pius XII's Humani Generis and like protestants who twist the scriptures Catholics are no different than them when it comes to twisting the words of the Pope.

Cardinal ratzingers comment is not an infallible one, and is his own private opinion, the last infallible statement coming from the Church with regards to evolution was Humani Generi which I will qoute you now.

1950 – On August 12, Pope Pius XII issues the encyclical Humani Generis which addressed false opinions that were threatening to undermine Catholic doctrine. The pope, in echoing St. Augustine and Providentissimus Deus, declared that the modern exegete’s desire to depart from a literal interpretation of Scripture in favor of a non-literal interpretation was foreign to Catholic teaching: “Further, according to their fictitious opinions, the literal sense of Holy Scripture and its explanation, carefully worked out under the Church's vigilance by so many great exegetes, should yield now to a new exegesis, which they are pleased to call symbolic or spiritual” (no. 23). “Everyone sees how foreign all this is to the principles and norms of interpretation rightly fixed by our predecessors of happy memory, Leo XIII in his Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, and Benedict XV in the Encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus, as also by Ourselves in the Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu” (no. 24). The pope also broached the theory of evolution with caution by stating that the Church “does not forbid research and discussions...with regard to evolution,” but warns that “divine revelation demands the greatest moderation and caution” when so discussing, and says we must ultimately “submit to the judgment of the Church” (no. 36). The pope further condemned “polygenism,” the heretical belief that the human race is not the product of a single set of parents (Adam and Eve), but multiple parents, as evolutionary theory maintains.

The early Church Fathers were unanimous in their belief that God directly created all things out of nothing (not by an evolutionary process of secondary causes). None of the Fathers’ views ever supported the possibility of an evolutionary process in creation. The Fathers also agreed that God created the universe in six literal days. St. Augustine introduced an alternative theory which proposed that God may have created the entire world in an instant (not in six days, and certainly not in millions of years). However, Augustine also said that a six-day creation was possible as well. Are the Fathers’ views important to us as we interpret the Scriptures? The answer is: Yes, very important.

In 1564, the Council of Trent (Session IV, April 8), one of the Church’s most important councils and to which the Catholic conscience is bound forever, infallibly taught that no one could “in matters of faith and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine...interpret the sacred Scriptures...even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.” This infallible teaching was restated by the First Vatican Council in 1870.

Hence, the Church definitively teaches that the faithful cannot depart from the interpretation of the Fathers when they are unanimous in their interpretation of Scripture on a point of Revelation. This also means that we must defer to the unanimous opinion of the Fathers in all matters of Revelation, not just religious matters.

Pope Benedict XV stated that “by these precepts and limits [set by the Fathers of the Church]...wish, indeed, that inspiration itself pertain to all ideas, rather even to the individual words of the Bible...” Spiritus Paraclitus, September 15, 1920. The pope condemned contrary opinions by stating “For their belief is that that only which concerns religion is intended and is taught by God in the Scriptures; but that the rest, which pertains to the profane disciplines...is left to the feebleness of the writer...But how rashly, how falsely this is affirmed.” Ibid.

Why are the Fathers important? The Church teaches that the Fathers are important because they received the rule of interpretations from the successors to the apostles and the apostles themselves. The Fathers “endeavored to acquire the understanding of the Holy Scriptures not by their own lights and ideas, but from the writings and authority of the ancients, who in their turn, as we know, received the rule of interpretation in direct line from the Apostles.” Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, No. 14, 1893.

Now I'll shall allow you to debate with John Salza as if your interested in learning the truth about what the church teaches regarding evolution you'll e-mail him.

I end my discussion on the matter with the words from St.Anthony the Great ''When you find someone arguing, and contesting what is true, and self evident, break off the dispute and give way to such a man, since his intellect has been petrified. For just as bad water ruins good wines, so harmful talk corrupts those who are virtuous in life and character. ''

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 1:38pm

Xluna wrote: »

A person who believes in a divine creator,a supreme being,but does not presume to know said creators intent nor expects the Deity to intervene in personal human affairs.

thats me so i guess!!

and that stephen guy (above) makes me sound less ignorant! do the church themselves know what their views are??

Tea 1000 · 18-02-2010 1:42pm

It looks like you've quoted a synopsis of the entire document, yet you criticise people for twisting words.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 1:42pm

Stephentlig wrote: »

I end my discussion on the matter with the words from St.Anthony the Great ''When you find someone arguing, and contesting what is true, and self evident, break off the dispute and give way to such a man, since his intellect has been petrified. For just as bad water ruins good wines, so harmful talk corrupts those who are virtuous in life and character. ''

Butter my arse, what a quote!!

prinz · 18-02-2010 1:52pm

Stephentlig wrote: »

Cardinal ratzingers comment is not an infallible one, and is his own private opinion, the last infallible statement coming from the Church with regards to evolution was Humani Generi which I will qoute you now...

Can you show where/when/how Humani Generis is to be taken as infallible?

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 2:00pm

http://www.ucg.org.uk/ad/ev/?gclid=CM-wo8r4-58CFVpb4wodX21qjw

this was an advertisement at the bottom of the page!!

PDN · 18-02-2010 2:18pm

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

http://www.ucg.org.uk/ad/ev/?gclid=CM-wo8r4-58CFVpb4wodX21qjw

this was an advertisement at the bottom of the page!!

I wouldn't worry about that. Ads are generated by keywords in posts.

I once wrote a blog post while I was on a cruise, and happened to refer in passing to homosexuality, to this day I get lots of people find their way to my blog by googling about gay cruises. They must be mightily disappointed to find themselves reading my opinions on sociology, missiology and church history - but to date no-one has been so ungracious as to leave me any unkind comments.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 2:22pm

PDN wrote: »

I wouldn't worry about that. Ads are generated by keywords in posts.

I once wrote a blog post while I was on a cruise, and happened to refer in passing to homosexuality, to this day I get lots of people find their way to my blog by googling about gay cruises. They must be mightily disappointed to find themselves reading my opinions on sociology, missiology and church history - but to date no-one has been so ungracious as to leave me any unkind comments.

oh so your a fag??

thats a joke by the way... hahaha well not really

PDN · 18-02-2010 2:35pm

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

oh so your a fag??

thats a joke by the way... hahaha well not really

Yes, and we all know that God hates cigarettes.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 2:38pm

PDN wrote: »

Yes, and we all know that God hates cigarettes.

no i was asking were you a homosexual?!?!

PDN · 18-02-2010 3:02pm

grrrrrrrrrr wrote: »

no i was asking were you a homosexual?!?!

I don't accept labels based on orientation. I think that our behaviour is what matters. But that's a bit of a whole other subject in itself.

A bit off topic, but in answer to your question, prior to my conversion from atheism to Christianity in 1981 I experienced sex with women (of my own free will and volition) and with men (not of my own free will or volition - i.e. child abuse). Then upon conversion I decided that the correct place for sexual activity was within marriage and so abstained until then.

I have been happily married to the same woman since 1986 and obviously chose the right one since I've never wanted to get involved with anyone else in that time, nor do I want or expect to be anything else but faithful and monogamous in the future.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 3:08pm

PDN wrote: »

I don't accept labels based on orientation. I think that our behaviour is what matters. But that's a bit of a whole other subject in itself.

A bit off topic, but in answer to your question, prior to my conversion from atheism to Christianity in 1981 I experienced sex with women (of my own free will and volition) and with men (not of my own free will or volition - i.e. child abuse). Then upon conversion I decided that the correct place for sexual activity was within marriage and so abstained until then.

I have been happily married to the same woman since 1986 and obviously chose the right one since I've never wanted to get involved with anyone else in that time, nor do I want or expect to be anything else but faithful and monogamous in the future.

Well done fair play!!:D

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 3:21pm

he's dead right

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHqOG8p0Lkc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHqOG8p0Lkc

ItisintheSTARS · 18-02-2010 3:33pm

prinz wrote: »

You know that s**t you don't think has anything to do with spirituality?..... that's Catholicism.

It is very fashoinable to say that it has nothing to do with spirituality,
but that is not true.
I will say that without the Catholic church we would not have evolved to the position in the West that we have .
The spititual path is many sided,and includes Organised religion,which brings together,and disciplines during the PROGRESS towards a higher position in the human condition.

It is like saying that Primary school has nothing to do with Education ,
or even secondary school.
You are living in the society ,which has been more or less CREATED by the Catholic Church.
Yes there is a new phase now,but abandon all that you have been given ,and it is like a Rocket without a launching pad,the rocket cannot take off .
The church is flawed ,and was never meant to any other way,because it is full of human beings.
However the Fundamental laws of the church have always been true,while
many mistakes,even crimes have been made by people who say they are Catholics.
Another thing is that Ireland is a special case ,for the Shadow of colonialism has never totally gone,and Ireland has never been compensated for the crimes done by that power.
The catholic church helped the Irish survive those times,but it must let go
of the power it gained at this time in the community,and concentrate on
it's spiritual,healing role,avoiding politics etc.
People are totally free to think for themselves,and to follow what ever god or believe they wish in whatever way they wish.
There are different levels of awareness,and the church had to cater for them all,so she took the path of helping the lowest ,but now she must enter into dialogue with the more advanced or she will fail.
Although intellectual rigour ,and knowledge are part ,and a neccessary one for the spiritual truth ,that cannnot be found until the heart submits,and the Church knew this ,and therein lies her strength.
Her weakness was to ignore the needs of the intellectually more advance and curious, in order to keep the 'sheep' in the fold,and so she lost the former.

But her role is not mainly intellectual anyway,for it is easier to Learn facts ,than to be quiet,and to submit to faith in God, much easier if you are well educated to reject 'faith',and that is the challenge of the individual ,not the church.

grrrrrrrrrr · 18-02-2010 3:40pm

ItisintheSTARS wrote: »

It is very fashoinable to say that it has nothing to do with spirituality,
but that is not true.
I will say that without the Catholic church we would not have evolved to the position in the West that we have .
The spititual path is many sided,and includes Organised religion,which brings together,and disciplines during the PROGRESS towards a higher position in the human condition.

It is like saying that Primary school has nothing to do with Education ,
or even secondary school.
You are living in the society ,which has been more or less CREATED by the Catholic Church.
Yes there is a new phase now,but abandon all that you have been given ,and it is like a Rocket without a launching pad,the rocket cannot take off .
The church is flawed ,and was never meant to any other way,because it is full of human beings.
However the Fundamental laws of the church have always been true,while
many mistakes,even crimes have been made by people who say they are Catholics.
Another thing is that Ireland is a special case ,for the Shadow of colonialism has never totally gone,and Ireland has never been compensated for the crimes done by that power.
The catholic church helped the Irish survive those times,but it must let go
of the power it gained at this time in the community,and concentrate on
it's spiritual,healing role,avoiding politics etc.
People are totally free to think for themselves,and to follow what ever god or believe they wish in whatever way they wish.
There are different levels of awareness,and the church had to cater for them all,so she took the path of helping the lowest ,but now she must enter into dialogue with the more advanced or she will fail.
Although intellectual rigour ,and knowledge are part ,and a neccessary one for the spiritual truth ,that cannnot be found until the heart submits,and the Church knew this ,and therein lies her strength.
Her weakness was to ignore the needs of the intellectually more advance and curious, in order to keep the 'sheep' in the fold,and so she lost the former.

But her role is not mainly intellectual anyway,for it is easier to Learn facts ,than to be quiet,and to submit to faith in God, much easier if you are well educated to reject 'faith',and that is the challenge of the individual ,not the church.

didnt read the entire post but i would say the world is a better place with the church than without it.

i see the comfort the church can bring to people, specially the elderly.
if i came across some ancient scripts in the morning than proved the church was completely and utterly wrong i do not think i would release them!!

the church has and does do a lot of good work. they havent given alot to education in this country despite the negative publicity with the abuse.

Am Christian/Catholic?? Opinions?

Comments