Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match!

A place to learn, mingle, and share

Discussion related to living as a Catholic in the single state of life. As long as a topic is being discussed from the perspective of a single Catholic then it will be on-topic.

Tobias and Sarah's story is from the Book of Tobit, and his journey is guided by Saint Raphael.
Learn More: Tobias & Sarah as led by Saint Raphael

Jul 3rd 2014 new
(quote) Kevin-40666 said: Wouldn't agreement with the latter imply agreement with the former ?

http://tinyurl.com/mwc7ulm

A very good reference, Kevin.

This sums up the Church teaching:

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

APOSTOLIC LETTER
ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS
OF JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON RESERVING PRIESTLY ORDINATION
TO MEN ALONE

Even though this document is addressed to the bishops, it calls upon ALL the faithful to willful obedience to an everlasting truth.

All should note that it is just not Christ that can render "judgment" in appropriate and very important areas. Lest we ignore that the Vicar of Christ may also bind, we should recall Christ's words to Peter and his successors regarding Christ's intent to honor that to which we have been bound to; it will thus be so at time of FINAL judgment too.

So, PJPII's clear judgment on this matter holds for us in our lifetimes, as it has consistently in others. Christ will honor the above, because He said so and because He intended it to be maintained as such.

Jul 3rd 2014 new
(quote) Paul-1049651 said: It was so much easier in the first century. You saw Jesus, you heard him preach, you decided to follow him, and that was that. No one came up to you with a shelf-full of Counter-Reformation literature and said "Not so fast--unless you're prepared to subscribe to every article in these books, you can't be a follower. And no skipping over the parts about indulgences, either!"
www.biblegateway.com
Jul 3rd 2014 new
(quote) Kevin-40666 said: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A16&version=NKJV
Howdy Kevin...

Don't forget about the Scribes and Pharisees,who had more doctrine that a person could shake a at...
Jul 3rd 2014 new
(quote) Dennis-754668 said: Howdy Kevin...

Don't forget about the Scribes and Pharisees,who had more doctrine that a person could shake a at...
It would seem that the Pharisees' problem was not what they preached,
but rather what they practiced:

tinyurl.com

Jul 4th 2014 new
(quote) Paul-1049651 said: It was so much easier in the first century. You saw Jesus, you heard him preach, you decided to follow him, and that was that. No one came up to you with a shelf-full of Counter-Reformation literature and said "Not so fast--unless you're prepared to subscribe to every article in these books, you can't be a follower. And no skipping over the parts about indulgences, either!"
"If you love me, keep my commandments." (John 14:15)

Now, as we have seen with Peter, even the Apostles could have difficulty living up to their faith at times. But when they failed they repented and kept trying. What they didn't do is try to rationalize their own interpretations of the commandments to justify their failings.

Jul 4th 2014 new
(quote) Dennis-754668 said: Howdy Kevin...

Don't forget about the Scribes and Pharisees,who had more doctrine that a person could shake a at...
What, precisely, is it about the Scribes and Pharisees you admonish us not to forget?

Jul 4th 2014 new
I'll take that back Jerry... Maybe we should forget everything about them...
Jul 4th 2014 new
Well said Huong

Mick
Jul 15th 2014 new
(quote) Carolina-1069841 said: Dear Ben,

If you are a Catholic, you accept all Church teachings, if not, you are not a Catholic.
Since statements like this are not uncommon in these forums, I am going to address it here rather than remove the post, not to pick on the author, but so (hopefully) others will learn from it as well.

While I understand what the author is trying to say, thie statement above is problematic for several reasons:

(1) It violates CM Forum rule #2 ("You may not question a person's Catholicity. You may only question the Catholicity of their ideas, so long as it is backed up with approved Church documentation."). First it is directed at the person, not there ideas; and, second, there is documentation provided to support it. (Note that this rule applies even when the statement is not addressed to a specific person.)

(2) The problem here is more than just a technical violation of a rule. Statements such as this, even if completely precise and accurate (which it is not, but more on this later), are very polarizing and equally ineffective: they resonate well with those who agree and evoke defensive reactions from those who don't. Addressing thoughts rather than people tends to reduce the defensiveness, especially when evidence is provided to support that it is a Church teaching, not a personal opinion. Providing the documentation also helps clear up some of the imprecision and error, as they often become apparent in the process.

(3) The imprecision arises from differing interpretations of "being a Catholic" and "accepting Church teachings." This is a complicated topic that could be the subject of a short (or perhaps not-so-short) paper; it certainly can't be adequately summed up in a sentence or two. I will try to elaborate a bit more below, but time does not permit doing justice to this subject.

It is one thing for an individual to not understand a teaching of the Church or to struggle with accepting it, as long as their are working toward bring themself in conformity with the Chirch and not obstinately rejecting it ("I can believe what I want...")

One who has been baptized a Catholic or formally accepted into the Catholic Church is a Catholic unless they formally declare they are not -- if that is still possible (there used to be a way to do this that was specified in Canon law; however, Pope Benedict XVI removed that a few years ago.) Even those who are formally excommunicated are still Catholic and subject to most of the rules of the Church.

Those who obstinately reject (as opposed to struggling with while trying to reconcile their beliefs) Church teachings are not in union with the Church, which has a variety of implications including whether they should be receiving the sacraments until they return to union. This is something that each individual should discuss with a confessor or spiritual director, not a weapon to beat people over the head with in an Internet forum. They might also reflect on whether they can honestly recite the Creed at Mass: do you believe in the "ONE, holy, catholic and apostolic Church" if you are rejecting her teachings for your own beliefs, even if only on one or two points?

Who belongs to the Catholic Church? (CCC 846-838)
What does 'catholic' mean? (CCC 830-831)
The Church is One (CCC811-812; 813-822)

Jul 15th 2014 new
(quote) Juan-1022000 said: PS. Jesus didn't ordain a single woman priest, nor have the disciples the authority to do it; that's the only reason why nobody else can.
That's one reason, but not the only reason. Important aspects of the theology of the priesthood are based on the fact that Christ and priests, who are in persona Christi, are male and that the Church, His bride, is female.

Posts 41 - 50 of 55