Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View How do I remain in the flock?
5 years ago  ::  Sep 01, 2009 - 1:34PM #1
Justly
Posts: 186

Hi ya'll, I hope you don't mind me posting this here.  Seems the "cafe" is the happenin' PL nowadays on the Cath forums on B-net.  I really liked the older B-net better.  It seemed there was more action on various forums.  I'm also certain this has been tirelessly discussed.  But I always seem to be considering leaving the church completely due to my conscience dissenting on a whole host of matters we all hear about.  But I was thinking since many of you here @ "Ave Maria" are probably more "conservative" than me, I was wondering how you coped with this...


Besides the molestation sins by the priests, I know you will probably say they are human and capable of sin like the rest of us...  how did you then cope with the ensuing cover-up that followed by the hierarchy when these men were supposedly led by the Holy Spirit in faith and morals as keepers of the one, true Church?  It's so difficult for me to understand how the HS would lead the true Church's leaders to do such a thing.


  False prophets?  Sure.  But then many of these men were not known to be false until it was too late.  And if we should not put our faith in men, then doesn't the whole concept fall apart?


Anyways thank you for helping me understand.  Peace and God bless.     

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 01, 2009 - 4:16PM #2
TemplarS
Posts: 6,693

In my experience, the Holy Spirit can prompt individuals to do the right thing, but the individuals still need to respond.  Bishops and even Popes are not immune from this; there have been a couple of very sleazy Popes in our history. 


As far as the Church goes, Jesus promised that it would prevail, not that it would be perfect. The proof of his promise is the fact that the Church has survived for 2,000 years not because its leaders are perfect but in spite of the fact that they are imperfect.  The source of righteousness in the Church is Jesus, not any human.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 01, 2009 - 4:25PM #3
cove52
Posts: 999

Amen, Templar!

"I yam what I yam and I yam what I yam that I yam / And I got a lotta muscle and I only gots one eye / And I'll never hurt nobodys and I'll never tell a lie / Top to me bottom and me bottom to me top / That's the way it is 'til the day that I drop, what am I? / I yam what I yam."
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 01, 2009 - 8:25PM #4
Justly
Posts: 186

Thanks Templar and Cove for your "second".  Out of 20 views I appreciate your response.  So basically we are just to accept some things the leaders proclaim on faith and morals and then on other things say they are dead wrong?

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 01, 2009 - 10:35PM #5
WaveringCC
Posts: 5,124

Sep 1, 2009 -- 4:16PM, TemplarS wrote:


In my experience, the Holy Spirit can prompt individuals to do the right thing, but the individuals still need to respond.  Bishops and even Popes are not immune from this; there have been a couple of very sleazy Popes in our history. 


As far as the Church goes, Jesus promised that it would prevail, not that it would be perfect. The proof of his promise is the fact that the Church has survived for 2,000 years not because its leaders are perfect but in spite of the fact that they are imperfect.  The source of righteousness in the Church is Jesus, not any human.




Templar,


I don't disagree what you say about the fact that human beings, ALL human beings, often ignore the promptings of the Holy Spirit.  In fact, I know many Catholics who believe that the priest shortage is the result of the PTB ignoring the promptings of the Holy Spirit!


Where I take issue with you is your surprising (surprising for you, because you are a consistently intelligent, moderate, and thoughtful poster), assertion that the fact that Christianity has survived for 2000 years is "proof" that the church would "prevail." That may in fact be true, but it may also ignore the reality that God seems also to help non-Christian eligions to "prevail".


This statement seems to ignore the fact that Judaism is thousands of years older than Christianity, that Hinduism is even older than Judaism, and that even Buddhism is also several hundred years older than Christianity.  As far as major world religions go, Christianity has "prevailed" for far less time than most - in fact, has endured for less time than all other major religions other than Islam.  And now Islam, a bit "younger" than Christianity, seems to be the fastest growing major religion in the world - a sign that it will "prevail"?


So, if Jesus is not the source of the "righteousness" of the other major world religions, would you agree that God (by whatever name one chooses to call God, or the "divine") is the source of the "righteousness" of ALL the world's major religions?  And that perhaps God has provided all of these separate ways for human beings to come to know the Divine source of all life and all love and all creation?


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2009 - 11:17AM #6
Pensive
Posts: 139

Sep 1, 2009 -- 10:35PM, WaveringCC wrote:


Sep 1, 2009 -- 4:16PM, TemplarS wrote:


In my experience, the Holy Spirit can prompt individuals to do the right thing, but the individuals still need to respond.  Bishops and even Popes are not immune from this; there have been a couple of very sleazy Popes in our history. 


As far as the Church goes, Jesus promised that it would prevail, not that it would be perfect. The proof of his promise is the fact that the Church has survived for 2,000 years not because its leaders are perfect but in spite of the fact that they are imperfect.  The source of righteousness in the Church is Jesus, not any human.




Templar,


I don't disagree what you say about the fact that human beings, ALL human beings, often ignore the promptings of the Holy Spirit.  In fact, I know many Catholics who believe that the priest shortage is the result of the PTB ignoring the promptings of the Holy Spirit!


Where I take issue with you is your surprising (surprising for you, because you are a consistently intelligent, moderate, and thoughtful poster), assertion that the fact that Christianity has survived for 2000 years is "proof" that the church would "prevail." That may in fact be true, but it may also ignore the reality that God seems also to help non-Christian religions to "prevail".


This statement seems to ignore the fact that Judaism is thousands of years older than Christianity, that Hinduism is even older than Judaism, and that even Buddhism is also several hundred years older than Christianity.  As far as major world religions go, Christianity has "prevailed" for far less time than most - in fact, has endured for less time than all other major religions other than Islam.  And now Islam, a bit "younger" than Christianity, seems to be the fastest growing major religion in the world - a sign that it will "prevail"?


So, if Jesus is not the source of the "righteousness" of the other major world religions, would you agree that God (by whatever name one chooses to call God, or the "divine") is the source of the "righteousness" of ALL the world's major religions?  And that perhaps God has provided all of these separate ways for human beings to come to know the Divine source of all life and all love and all creation?


 




Well I cannot speak for TemplarS, but I did not see his post as an affirmation of Christianity over all other world religions.  He was pointing out that it has endured for 2000 years, so over that long period of its exisitance its followers have found something valuable enough in it so that it could endure for such a period.  he also points out that Jesus promised that his Church would endure, and it has in fact endured for 2000 years.  Nothing in his post indicates he believes Chrisitianity better or more enduring than other religions, but  explains why he believes it has value despite its shortingcomings, which is what the initial question was about.  Peace.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2009 - 11:26AM #7
TemplarS
Posts: 6,693

Justly-


Well, for me, anyway, I do not expect to stop thinking about various issues of faith, nor necessarily take somebody's word on things.  If the Church says it acts in Jesus' name, I expect to see something consistent with what Jesus said and did while he walked the earth.   In point of fact, I see great sense in Jesus message; the challenge for the Church is to put this message forward effectively.  In the 21st century, though, I think the Church must act more as teacher than doctrinal dictator, letting itself be carried by the force of its (Jesus') ideas and not "because we say so".  


In such a mode, for better or worse, the personal habits of the teachers will of necessity receive increasing scrutiny.


Wavering-


Can people follow God through other paths than Christianity, and will God respond to such?  The evidence suggests yes.  As you note, Judasim and Islam have also been around for a while also;  I know enough faithful Muslims and Jews to see the presence in God in the way they live their lives.  Naturally, those faiths have also seen their share of unGodly leaders. Apart from that, I would say not all religions provide equally sure or valid paths to God, but I don't feel the need to judge others at this point. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2009 - 11:29AM #8
WaveringCC
Posts: 5,124

Sep 2, 2009 -- 11:17AM, Pensive wrote:


Sep 1, 2009 -- 10:35PM, WaveringCC wrote:


Sep 1, 2009 -- 4:16PM, TemplarS wrote:


In my experience, the Holy Spirit can prompt individuals to do the right thing, but the individuals still need to respond.  Bishops and even Popes are not immune from this; there have been a couple of very sleazy Popes in our history. 


As far as the Church goes, Jesus promised that it would prevail, not that it would be perfect. The proof of his promise is the fact that the Church has survived for 2,000 years not because its leaders are perfect but in spite of the fact that they are imperfect.  The source of righteousness in the Church is Jesus, not any human.




Templar,


I don't disagree what you say about the fact that human beings, ALL human beings, often ignore the promptings of the Holy Spirit.  In fact, I know many Catholics who believe that the priest shortage is the result of the PTB ignoring the promptings of the Holy Spirit!


Where I take issue with you is your surprising (surprising for you, because you are a consistently intelligent, moderate, and thoughtful poster), assertion that the fact that Christianity has survived for 2000 years is "proof" that the church would "prevail." That may in fact be true, but it may also ignore the reality that God seems also to help non-Christian religions to "prevail".


This statement seems to ignore the fact that Judaism is thousands of years older than Christianity, that Hinduism is even older than Judaism, and that even Buddhism is also several hundred years older than Christianity.  As far as major world religions go, Christianity has "prevailed" for far less time than most - in fact, has endured for less time than all other major religions other than Islam.  And now Islam, a bit "younger" than Christianity, seems to be the fastest growing major religion in the world - a sign that it will "prevail"?


So, if Jesus is not the source of the "righteousness" of the other major world religions, would you agree that God (by whatever name one chooses to call God, or the "divine") is the source of the "righteousness" of ALL the world's major religions?  And that perhaps God has provided all of these separate ways for human beings to come to know the Divine source of all life and all love and all creation?


 




Well I cannot speak for TemplarS, but I did not see his post as an affirmation of Christianity over all other world religions.  He was pointing out that it has endured for 2000 years, so over that long period of its exisitance its followers have found something valuable enough in it so that it could endure for such a period.  he also points out that Jesus promised that his Church would endure, and it has in fact endured for 2000 years.  Nothing in his post indicates he believes Chrisitianity better or more enduring than other religions, but  explains why he believes it has value despite its shortingcomings, which is what the initial question was about.  Peace.




If your understanding of Templar's post is correct, than I agree with you. 


Many of the more neo-orthodox posters on Bnet often say that "obviously" the RCC is the "one, true church" because it is 2000 years old.  This is a simplistic and incomplete understanding, and not one that those who have read many of Templar's posts would expect from him.


I imagine that your interpretation of his words is the correct one.  And, that would be true also of other major religions - they provide something of "value" that holds people.  


This is one reason that I am more involved these days with "spirituality" rather than "religion".  I have found that the "great themes" appear in all of the great religions - Jesus was not the first to articulate them.  And if one focuses on these "great themes", rather than the often petty disagreements that take place within specific religions, and between the "great" religions, it is far easier to focus on God and one's relationship with God than when drawn into constant bickering over translations of scripture, or canon law of the RCC, or other discussions that really have nothing to do with what is of profound importance to all seekers, everywhere, and in every age.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 03, 2009 - 10:50PM #9
Mareczku
Posts: 2,220

Justly, I think the cover-up was as bad as the abuse for many.  Many of the abuse victims were abused again by bishops and church lawyers.  They were treated like traitors and outcasts.  I really learned a lot about this when I started at Beliefnet 2 years ago.  I don't think it hit me as much until I started talking to people here and starting thinking about it and expressing my feelings.  It really hit close to home for me when I found out that the priest that taught me Religion for 3 years in high school was a predator.  I went to a small, close-knit Catholic high school.  We had a lot of wonderful nuns at my school.  I was horrified to find out some of the things that this guy did.  He didn't get removed from a parish until 20 years after the fact.  In a way I am surprised at the strength of my reaction.  I think learning more about the Church here has made me more progressive.  I tended to be more conservative but am not as much anymore.  Finding out about the abuse hasn't really made me any less devout.  I still have a great love for Mass and the Eucharist.  I think this is the heart of our faith.  I feel sad that some people get discouraged and leave the Church.


On a personal aside, Wavering, on another site one of the men told me that I should leave the Church.  He actually told me to go join the Episcopal Church.  He also tells people on the site that I am not a good Catholic and that they should ignore me.  One thing that I like about Beliefnet is that the people tend to be more tolerant and accepting of other views.


Peace - Mark 


 


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2009 - 11:25PM #10
Pensive
Posts: 139

Yes, as much as some people complain, this site is MUCH tamer than other sites I made the mistake of entering.  Surprised

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook