A la carte catholics ... for or against?

AudreyHepburn

antiskeptic wrote: »

The point is that you don't. The Christian community would consider the Resurrection a core pillar of the faith. If you don't believe in that you don't share in any meaningful way with that community. You'd be like the atheist who believes in God.



There's nothing wrong with it per se. It's just that your position: a Christian who doesn't believe in the Resurrection is incongruent.

I wish people would stop telling me what I am or am not, what I believe or don't believe.

I dealt with all that already, can we please not go there again for everyone's sake? Please?

antiskeptic

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I wish people would stop telling me what I am or am not, what I believe or don't believe.

My apologies if I misunderstood you're not believing in the Resurrection. Do you?

I'm not telling you what you are or are not. I'm merely explaining that a person calling themselves a Christian yet who doesn't believe in the Resurrection is occupying an incongruent position. they'd be more accurate were they to call themselves an Incongruent Christian but that's up to them

liamw

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I wish people would stop telling me what I am or am not, what I believe or don't believe.

Why do you keep saying this? Nobody's telling you what to believe.

Zillah

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

what I believe or don't believe

What you don't seem to understand is that no one is talking about what you believe, what we are talking about is the implications and labels attached to your beliefs, as stated.

I'm not, for example, telling you that you do or do not believe in the resurrection. What I'm saying is that if you do not believe in the resurrection (as you have stated) then according to the English language and Christendom you are not really a Christian. Similarly I'm not telling you anything about what you believe or dispute among Catholic teachings, what I'm saying is that if you do dispute the core beliefs of the Catholic faith then you are not, once again, as the rest of the world considers it, a Catholic.

AudreyHepburn

Sorry what I should've said was I wish people wouldn't keep telling me what they think I should believe in order to be Christian or Catholic or what faith I they think I shouldn't or shouldn't be.

Why is not possible to be Catholic or Christian or any other faith but yet question some of it's teachings?

Herbal Deity

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Why is not possible to be Catholic or Christian or any other faith but yet question some of it's teachings?

The same reason it's not possible to be a black person if you have white skin.

AudreyHepburn

Herbal Deity wrote: »

The same reason it's not possible to be a black person if you have white skin.

Two different things. You are born black or white and there is no way to change that (unless you're Michael Jackson). That's genetics, biology, it's fixed.

You can of course question why you are born a certain colour but you can't change it.

Religious ideas and beliefs however are flexible. You can question them, change them or abandon them altogether if you want.

AudreyHepburn

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Sorry what I should've said was I wish people wouldn't keep telling me what they think I should believe in order to be Christian or Catholic or what faith I they think I shouldn't or shouldn't be.

Why is not possible to be Catholic or Christian or any other faith but yet question some of it's teachings?

Being a catholic but sticking to say, no contraception, but questioning it - that's being a catholic.
Being a christian and saying "no I don't believe in the resurrection" is a much more fundamental part of christendom. It's not nitpicking or questioning some implications or whatever, it's nearly the whole basis for the religion. It really is on the same level as saying "I'm an atheist who believes in god"

krudler

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Sorry what I should've said was I wish people wouldn't keep telling me what they think I should believe in order to be Christian or Catholic or what faith I they think I shouldn't or shouldn't be.

Why is not possible to be Catholic or Christian or any other faith but yet question some of it's teachings?

Theres a difference between questioning "some" of its teachings, and plainly stating you dont believe in the absolute fundamental beliefs of the faith.

like bluewolf said it really is the same as an athiest who believes in god, or even someone saying they're a vegetarian but enjoys a decent steak , doesnt make sense.

antiskeptic

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Why is not possible to be Catholic or Christian or any other faith but yet question some of it's teachings?

Not believing in the resurrection isn't questioning some of it's teachings, it's denying a definitional statement of what a Christianity involves. There isn't an absolute court which will pronounce on this so you can believe Krishna is God and call yourself a Christian if you like (questioning the Christian teaching that Krishna isn't God).

The court of the dog in the street will wonder what on earth is going on in your head though.

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

But what's wrong with allying yourself with a particular faith?

I know it's not life or death which faith I am but I like being part of a wider community who share my values and ideas.

What's so wrong with that? Why does it bother you so much?

I wouldn't call it wrong, I just don't really understand it.
Imagine a group of people, who define themselves by certain beliefs, religious or otherwise. I share some of them, but when it comes to those most defining ones, I disagree. Why would I still have such a strong attachment to the name of the group?

To give an example : I'm not eating any meat. I do eat some fish, though, now and again.
If I called myself a vegetarian, other vegetarians would get quite upset (mostly because things like that muddle the understanding of vegetarianism in the public mind, and it does lead to vegetarians being served fish by friends and family who misunderstand, or being told about the fish courses when asking for a vegetarian options. Nothing life-threatening, just annoying), and I understand that.
That said, I still do post on the Vegetarian forum on here, it's not as if you're automatically excluded just because you don't follow the same rules. You just don't get to use the name, that's all.

I'm not Christian any more, so I don't know how they would feel about it, but I can imagine a number of people getting confused and upset if somebody presents themselves as Christian while not actually believing in some of the key aspects of the faith.
And I honestly, really don't get why somebody would want to?

Herbal Deity

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Religious ideas and beliefs however are flexible. You can question them, change them or abandon them altogether if you want.

Anyone can believe what they want, it's at what point can you not really call yourself a Christian that is being discussed.

Like, do you think there is a limit to how unorthodox your beliefs can be, after which you can no longer call yourself a Christian?

tbh, I think you just like tradition, the Irish Catholic community, the rituals of Christening, Communion, Confirmation, Marriage, coming together once a week, talking to people after mass etc. My mother is similar. I don't think she really cares or thinks about the finer points of theology or the implications of her beliefs, it's just what she's grown up with.

And while there doesn't seem to be anything incredibly wrong with that, with so many people claiming to be Catholic, the church still has a huge amount of power, and subtly influences our society in many ways, especially with its control of schools. And what frustrates us atheists is that those claiming to be Catholic very often do not even hold strong Catholic beliefs. The reason you are somewhat under fire here is because you are a perfect example of exactly this.

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Why is not possible to be Catholic or Christian or any other faith but yet question some of it's teachings?

Because its a set of belief. You either do belief, or you don't.
Now, there's of course room for questions where interpretation is concerned, things like Mary being a virgin, how much of their bodies women have to cover if you were a Muslim, the transsubstantion, things of that ilk.

But the one of the most central if not THE key aspect of Christianity is that Jesus died for humanity's sins, and was resurrected.
Following his teachings would be just holding a philosophy. The faith comes into it when you believe that because of Jesus dying, you are saved.

It's a bit like being a Muslim, but not believing the Mohammed was a prophet. Or being a Jew and believing Moses carved those commandments himself.
It turns away from faith and towards philosophy.

As I said, you can call yourself whatever you feel like, it's a free enough country (;)), but people will be surprised and possibly put out by it, and that's understandable I think.

lmaopml

Perhaps I'm assuming too much here Audrey and correct me if I'm wrong, but you come across as someone who probably never really thought too much about the 'doctrine' and definition of your Catholic belief? Probably never 'had' to think about it before? or you were never put in a situation where you are confronted about it?

I can't remember exactly, but I 'think' back somewhere in the thread you mentioned that you just weren't 'sure' about certain things? not that you outright deny them? I don't know, I guess everybody struggles with various aspects of their faith....but to be honest the resurrection is really a fundamental of traditional orthodox mainstream belief..

Also, many of your views seem to allign moreso with some of the Protestant versions of Christianity, ie Real Presence versus Symbolic...

I guess there comes a time when everybody or most people are confronted with exactly what they believe and the route forward from there, so you're no different than many. Your right in the sense that 'faith' is not the same as a skin colour, and I wish you the best discovering yours wherever it leads, your always welcome in the Catholic Church as a person who 'struggles'......We all do in some way shape or form!

lmaopml

Just as a side note, and I'm sorry if my advice is unnecessary or unwanted..lol..but....

If I were you, I'd get a Catechism, maybe have a chat with the priest and clarify my thoughts etc. I would refrain, if you are someone who attends mass from receiving the Eucharist until you get your understanding of the doctrine sorted out...

Best of luck..

AudreyHepburn

I've thought about my faith regularly actually.

I'm not struggling with anything and I don't need a priest or anyone else to clarify my thoughts for me. I understand Doctrine perfectly well and don't need a catechism to help me.

I know what I believe and what I don't and I won't stop going to mass or recieving because there is no need.

I appreciate that you're trying to help me but I really really don't need it. I'm not confused about anything nor do I need help to decide what I believe or don't.

krudler

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'm not struggling with anything and I don't need a priest or anyone else to clarify my thoughts for me. I understand Doctrine perfectly well and don't need a catechism to help me.

I know what I believe and what I don't and I won't stop going to mass or recieving because there is no need.

I appreciate that you're trying to help me but I really really don't need it. I'm not confused about anything nor do I need help to decide what I believe or don't.

so why allign yourself to a faith where you dont believe in the absolute basic fundamental parts of it?

lmaopml

No probs! Best of luck anyways

AudreyHepburn

krudler wrote: »

so why allign yourself to a faith where you dont believe in the absolute basic fundamental parts of it?

Seriously? How many times do I have to try to justify myself to people?

Can you not just accept and respect that I see myself as Christian at the very least (I'm afraid to say the other C-word in case I get killed)?

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Seriously? How many times do I have to try to justify myself to people?

Can you not just accept and respect that I see myself as Christian at the very least (I'm afraid to say the other C-word in case I get killed)?

Can you not see why it would confuse the hell out of people?
It is similar to me calling myself a vegetarian, but still eating animals.

ColmDawson

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Seriously? How many times do I have to try to justify myself to people?

Can you not just accept and respect that I see myself as Christian at the very least (I'm afraid to say the other C-word in case I get killed)?

It's just hard to understand because you really have to believe in the resurrection to be a Christian.

krudler

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Seriously? How many times do I have to try to justify myself to people?

Can you not just accept and respect that I see myself as Christian at the very least (I'm afraid to say the other C-word in case I get killed)?

The church probably doesnt though given your disbelief in the most basic parts of the faith. Again, believing in Christ doesnt make you a christian, Muslims, Jews, and most of the other major faiths believe in Christ, what makes Christians Christian is that they believe he died and was resurrected, simple as. If you dont believe that you cant call yourself a Christian, as has been pointed out by nearly everyone (christians included) on here.

AudreyHepburn

Ok fine I'm not Christian then!!!!

There, satisfied? I've conceded yet again to you.

Herbal Deity

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Ok fine I'm not Christian then!!!!

There, satisfied? I've conceded yet again to you.

This really isn't about point scoring, it's just a discussion...

If you don't want to have a discussion about the intricacies of your beliefs, then you don't have to post here.

Am I right, as I said in my last post, that it's the Irish Catholic tradition and the community more than anything that appeals you?

ColmDawson

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Ok fine I'm not Christian then!!!!

There, satisfied? I've conceded yet again to you.

We don't want you to do anything for us, we just were perplexed by the contradiction in what you were saying. I understand that realising your beliefs don't fit in the box you thought they fitted in can feel strange and confusing, but there's no need to be angry at us.

AudreyHepburn

Herbal Deity wrote: »

This really isn't about point scoring, it's just a discussion...

If you don't want to have a discussion about the intricacies of your beliefs, then you don't have to post here.

Am I right, as I said in my last post, that it's the Irish Catholic tradition and the community more than anything that appeals you?

I do want a discussion, I enjoy a good debate. I just don't understand what's so wrong with the way I believe what I believe.

And I just feel like you won't let up until I say what I said above, that's all. Apologies if I have you wrong.

And it's more than the traditions, although I do like them. I actually do believe in Christ, God etc as I've stated many times already.

And I believe in the message ' Love thy neighbour' which to me is the most important aspect.

krudler

Again you're turning this into a "you vs us" thing, its not. but can you genuinely not see how people would view your views while proclaiming your apparent beliefs? I'm all for believing what you want but not at the expense of labelling yourself something you're not. I dont call myself an athiest, just a non believer.

Put it this way, if you found out the parish priest believed what you believe(non virgin birth, no resurrection), would you still go to mass? Woud you sit there and be told all this stuff by someone who didnt genuinely believe it? Because by attending mass in the prescence of a Christian congregation while not believing in the absolute fundamental belief required is, imo, disrespecting every single person thats in that church.

AudreyHepburn

krudler wrote: »

Again you're turning this into a "you vs us" thing, its not. but can you genuinely not see how people would view your views while proclaiming your apparent beliefs? I'm all for believing what you want but not at the expense of labelling yourself something you're not. I dont call myself an athiest, just a non believer.

Put it this way, if you found out the parish priest believed what you believe(non virgin birth, no resurrection), would you still go to mass? Woud you sit there and be told all this stuff by someone who didnt genuinely believe it? Because by attending mass in the prescence of a Christian congregation while not believing in the absolute fundamental belief required is, imo, disrespecting every single person thats in that church.

Are these not the same? Just curious!

And it would be more disrespectful to refuse to have anything to do with them IMO

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I do want a discussion, I enjoy a good debate. I just don't understand what's so wrong with the way I believe what I believe.

And I just feel like you won't let up until I say what I said above, that's all. Apologies if I have you wrong.

And it's more than the traditions, although I do like them. I actually do believe in Christ, God etc as I've stated many times already.

And I believe in the message ' Love thy neighbour' which to me is the most important aspect.

Love, it's not about us wanting you to agree with us. The world would be a boring place if that's what it was about.
It's just that you position confused a lot of people, and it wasn't you position about believing in Christ, God and the message of love, it was your position of not believing in some central aspects of Christianity, yet still claiming the name. As I said, a little like the vegetarian thing, really.

You can believe what you like, and call yourself whatever you want, but some positions will give rise to a lot of questions.
I personally don't doubt your beliefs, or disrespects them. I'm just a little confused about the combination of the label with the contents, if you get my meaning. Hence the questions.
Do keep calling yourself Christian, it apparently important to you (although why, I'm still struggling with). But please don't get angry or upset if people query and debate it.

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And it would be more disrespectful to refuse to have anything to do with them IMO

Are those the only two options?
Letting them believe that you believe things you don't, or cut them out of your life entirely?

AudreyHepburn

I'm not angry or upset, just frustrated.

I have no problem being questioning and having a debate.

All that is bugging me is people telling what I shouldn't or shouldn't call myself or what I should or shouldn't believe based the lable I choose.

Question me all you like, just don't think you can pick my beliefs or lables for me, that's all!

Herbal Deity

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I do want a discussion, I enjoy a good debate. I just don't understand what's so wrong with the way I believe what I believe.

And I just feel like you won't let up until I say what I said above, that's all. Apologies if I have you wrong.

And it's more than the traditions, although I do like them. I actually do believe in Christ, God etc as I've stated many times already.

And I believe in the message ' Love thy neighbour' which to me is the most important aspect.

Well, I suppose, simply put, that in terms of world view and morality, you seem quite progressive, and actually quite close to most of us atheists. "Love thy neighbour" is a very positive and widespread message. It is present in many philosophies and religions, not just Christianity, and most of us here would probably adhere to it. You don't hold any of the wackier beliefs of Christianity such as the resurrection. While you seem to view God through a Christian lense, it seems like much more of a personal God to you.

The Catholic Church still has a lot of power and in Ireland it is propped up by a large amount of lapsed/a la carte Catholics. This organisation is still very much anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, anti-masturbation, anti-contraception, against sex before marriage etc.

All that we want is to make you think a little.

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'm not angry or upset, just frustrated.

I have no problem being questioning and having a debate.

All that is bugging me is people telling what I shouldn't or shouldn't call myself or what I should or shouldn't believe based the lable I choose.

Question me all you like, just don't think you can pick my beliefs or lables for me, that's all!

Well, in a way I can't help myself. I'm a librarian to the core, words need to have meanings

What you believe is entirely up to yourself, there can't be any questions there at all. But names for groups of people were invented to put people with shared attributes together. It gets confusing when you add in people not sharing the attributes.
Like a white person calling herself black, or a straight guy claiming to be gay, a member of the green party agreeing with lifting the ban on whale hunting, somebody calling himself teetotaler but having a drink now and then, a Native American calling herself German....

Of course they all have every right to make those claims, but you see why it causes confusion?

AudreyHepburn

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I know what I believe and what I don't and I won't stop going to mass or recieving because there is no need.

You've said you're not a catholic but you're still going to go to mass and receive communion?
Don't you think that's a tad disrespectful to everyone who does believe it, that you're lying?

AudreyHepburn

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Well, I suppose, simply put, that in terms of world view and morality, you seem quite progressive, and actually quite close to most of us atheists. "Love thy neighbour" is a very positive and widespread message. It is present in many philosophies and religions, not just Christianity, and most of us here would probably adhere to it. You don't hold any of the wackier beliefs of Christianity such as the resurrection. While you seem to view God through a Christian lense, it seems like much more of a personal God to you.

The Catholic Church still has a lot of power and in Ireland it is propped up by a large amount of lapsed/a la carte Catholics. This organisation is still very much anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, anti-masturbation, anti-contraception, against sex before marriage etc.

All that we want is to make you think a little.

But I have thought, an awful lot and that's why my beliefs are what they are. I'm a-la-carte because after a lot concideration I still believe in God but there are things that just don't make sense for me to believe.

robindch

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Question me all you like, just don't think you can pick my beliefs or lables for me, that's all!

Your beliefs are your own, but labels are a bit more problematic

I'm sure if you asked a catholic priest, he'd say that you weren't a catholic. The same would probably happen for most of the protestant organizations, but probably not all.

Of what I've read of what you've written, I'd say that you share more beliefs with unitarians or deists than you do with any of the more specific religious organizations. But then again, those two labels are labels that those two groups use to identify themselves, and they're not labels that I apply to people myself any more than I generally identify people as 'catholic' or 'protestant', but rather talk about people who hold catholic or protestant beliefs.

As to what you are? Well, like above, you're a human being who holds beliefs and if you believe that you are identified by your beliefs rather than having a separate identity independent of them, then labelling will always be problem because no label will ever describe exactly what the unique you is.

AudreyHepburn

bluewolf wrote: »

You've said you're not a catholic but you're still going to go to mass and receive communion?
Don't you think that's a tad disrespectful to everyone who does believe it, that you're lying?

I'm liar now, am I?

sink

I have just skimmed over the past several pages having not ventured into this thread before and I must say it's fascinating reading. I do feel sympathy for you Audrey, coming here and laying bare your beliefs to a not exactly hospitable crowd must be difficult.

I think I understand why you wish to remain apart of the Catholic church even though you don't subscribe to it's beliefs. You are part of a community, you have developed social bonds with your fellow church goers. You likely feel welcomed and at home within that community and the thought of leaving it feels scary.

Community is both the best part of religion and the worst. It is both a supporter and capture. No one here can tell you that you would be happier outside the community than remaining inside. It's only a decision you can make.

AudreyHepburn

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'm liar now, am I?

If you've said you're not a catholic but you pretend to be one, then yes, that kind of is lying...

antiskeptic

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I do want a discussion, I enjoy a good debate. I just don't understand what's so wrong with the way I believe what I believe.

The way you believe what you believe involves destroying the definition of a word and replacing it with your own definition. You might:

..believe in Christ, God etc

..but even the demons believed that and I presume you don't hold that they too are Christians? And you might..

believe in the message ' Love thy neighbour' which to me is the most important aspect.

...bu even atheist believe that that is a most important thing. They, like you, don't believe in the resurrection. Could they call themselves Christians?.

You can, of course question who decides on this definition of 'Christian' in the same way as the God-believing atheist can question who it is that decides upon the definition of 'atheist'. But your really engaging in a non-sense.

Which is your perogative/

robindch

bluewolf wrote: »

If you've said you're not a catholic but you pretend to be one, then yes, that kind of is lying...

Calling another poster a liar, even a kind of a liar, is unparliamentary language and is not used in this forum.

Audrey has already made clear that she now understands that she does not hold the same religious views as the catholic church requires, so I think it's reasonable to conclude that she made a mistake in good faith when she originally referred to herself as "catholic".

robindch

robindch wrote: »

Calling another poster a liar, even a kind of a liar, is unparliamentary language and is not used in this forum.

Audrey has already made clear that she now understands that she does not hold the same religious views as the catholic church requires, so I think it's reasonable to conclude that she made a mistake in good faith when she originally referred to herself as "catholic".

Ok Audrey I'm sorry then, pretending is what I meant, I didn't mean to be offensive, I was just surprised you'd still go and receive communion and wonder what you thought everyone else would think of that

edit: robin I didn't mean she was lying when she originally called herself one, we all make mistakes and learn, I meant now that she has said she isn't, isn't it "pretending" to go back to mass as if nothing has happened

Shenshen

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'm liar now, am I?

I wouldn't go that far, but considering just how sacred the eucharist is for Catholics, taking it without believing is... well. I'm not sure.
I can imagine it would hurt the religious sentiment of some people.

krudler

Shenshen wrote: »

I wouldn't go that far, but considering just how sacred the eucharist is for Catholics, taking it without believing is... well. I'm not sure.
I can imagine it would hurt the religious sentiment of some people.

Definitely, some people wont take communion without giving confession first as its seen as a mortal sin to some catholics.

I've gone to funerals and weddings and christenings and the like but I dont involve myself in the prayers or take communion, I'm there because its a family event not for the religious aspects, and I definitely dont think it would go down too well with people if I lined up for communion while proclaming I dont believe in any of it.

lmaopml

Shenshen and Krudler, I hope you don't mind if I clarify..?

It's not so much because they themselves are 'offended' if a person receives the Eucharist and knowingly treats the sacrament in a blase manner ( although I know we have our fair share of tutters ) but because of concern actually 'for' the person who receives......as yes, Krudler is right we see it as a sin, and it should only ever be out of concern that you would remind someone of this, not out of feeling all precious about being Catholic or getting overly offended at what others in the pews are doing...The first motive should be 'concern' for the person as opposed to feeling offended iykwim..

Well, in theory that's the way it's meant to work anyways..

Shenshen

lmaopml wrote: »

Shenshen and Krudler, I hope you don't mind if I clarify..?

It's not so much because they themselves are 'offended' if a person receives the Eucharist and knowingly treats the sacrament in a blase manner ( although I know we have our fair share of tutters ) but because of concern actually 'for' the person who receives......as yes, Krudler is right we see it as a sin, and it should only ever be out of concern that you would remind someone of this, not out of feeling all precious about being Catholic or getting overly offended at what others in the pews are doing...The first motive should be 'concern' for the person as opposed to feeling offended iykwim..

Well, in theory that's the way it's meant to work anyways..

No problem whatsoever

I just vaguely remembered a case in the US a while back where a Catholic student received the eucharist, and instead of eating it straight away brought it back to the pew where a friend of his was to show it to him. Apparently, that caused quite an outcry by Catholics and clergy.

Pushtrak

Shenshen wrote: »

No problem whatsoever

I just vaguely remembered a case in the US a while back where a Catholic student received the eucharist, and instead of eating it straight away brought it back to the pew where a friend of his was to show it to him. Apparently, that caused quite an outcry by Catholics and clergy.

That sounds similar, but different to the Youtube Crackergate incident. Even atheists were complaining about that one. Lots of videos on it, so I linked to the search rather than any particular video on it.

lmaopml

Shenshen wrote: »

No problem whatsoever

I just vaguely remembered a case in the US a while back where a Catholic student received the eucharist, and instead of eating it straight away brought it back to the pew where a friend of his was to show it to him. Apparently, that caused quite an outcry by Catholics and clergy.

Yeah I guess it depends, you probably would have had to be there..... I imagine if they guy didn't realise what he was doing and did it in innocence than the outcry was unnecessary and I imagine it frightened the crap out of the young Catholic himself, not to mention that some nosey parker behind him must have been focusing on him and went ott. If they guy was really just being bad mannered and contemptous than I don't blame anybody pulling him up on it though...

Most people whether they have faith or no have good manners....They don't have to respect the faith to be a guest at Church, or even take part in any of it, but good manners are universal.

robindch

bluewolf wrote: »

she has said she isn't, isn't it "pretending" to go back to mass as if nothing has happened

I haven't seen Audrey say that she'll be going to mass as usual on Sunday, but then again, I haven't read all this thread either

I certainly would think it unusual, if, having decided that one isn't catholic, to head along as usual on Sunday morning regardless. That said, if it's a social occasion, or if the music is very good (as it is in, say, Christchurch Dublin), then I'd happily go along myself, though I probably wouldn't be having any of those peculiar biscuits they serve at half-time.

AudreyHepburn

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I've thought about my faith regularly actually.

I'm not struggling with anything and I don't need a priest or anyone else to clarify my thoughts for me. I understand Doctrine perfectly well and don't need a catechism to help me.

I know what I believe and what I don't and I won't stop going to mass or recieving because there is no need.

I appreciate that you're trying to help me but I really really don't need it. I'm not confused about anything nor do I need help to decide what I believe or don't.

robindch wrote: »

I haven't seen Audrey say that she'll be going to mass as usual on Sunday, but then again, I haven't read all this thread either

I certainly would think it unusual, if, having decided that one isn't catholic, to head along as usual on Sunday morning regardless. That said, if it's a social occasion, or if the music is very good (as it is in, say, Christchurch Dublin), then I'd happily go along myself, though I probably wouldn't be having any of those peculiar biscuits they serve at half-time.

Indeed we all go to mass for whatever occasion, but I assume "receiving" above means communion, which is why I had the issue in the first place