Ask-A-Catholic

[CDHealy]

Not sure about the four-part harmony.  That may have been a recent innovation.  But the lack of instruments . . . well, how the heck would you cart an organ around the Middle East?

[Elaine]

Hi Broach,

I understand.

I really understand the purity of someone's experience, for example, that would make them say years ago that we should -women- should wear a scarf over our heads  --for example. I feel such reverence and also feel what "someone" did back in the day.  I feel "naked" with out a covering on my head. In reverence and humilty.

That is just a small, simple example.   I do understand why our tummies should be empty for an hr to receive Jesus. I understand the logic of man  actually ---but it's that some are now rigid rules  - is just not "normal or right" for me.

Suggestions I can except - encouragements  -I can except. What they would like, I can except.     But when I get chased down the aisle by a big heavy guy because I'm taking the Eucharist to my nearby seat to hold and to be blocked by him is militaristic and way overboard. This is just an example.     What would he have done if I said I had had an apple before coming?   I'm not quite sure!!! Scary.  It was more of - I had an apple before I decided I had time to make mass.  Do I not go and not receive Communion bec I didn't anticipate coming?    See what I mean? Too many rules for me.

("He" didn't make me leave the church ---he was just a symptom that reminded me why I did leave. And I had to comfort him after because he realized esp - after seeing my innocence that he was being overreactive. But, in talking with him he continued to be dogmatic and out of sync with just plain happiness and the Holy Spirit - that I was sure feeling:)

Even the priest at my aunt's funeral talked about how he never knew a more devout person ---yet she hadn't had Communion for what? 55 yrs!
(newbie's because she married a divorcee.)

These things would make anyone question.  (Sorry, not you)  I too converted to RC when I was a freshman in High School. I was confirmed by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen and will never forget him and his eyes, smile and soft hands.

I'm a born again Christian now and the Catholic Church is just not for me --but Communion is down the block at 8:20am MWF- it's hard to not go because of some rules by men.

Go ahead try to convince me -but I don't see much hope in coming back to the RC.  It works for you - great.

God bless,
Elaine

[HRoberson]

I've got a question, when are you Catholics going to let those CofC'ers realize that their singing is a style invented by Catholics?

It was, actually, invented by Jews.

Assuming of course that synagogue singing was non-instrumental, as distinct from Temple worship......

[CDHealy]

Touche!

[Elaine]

I've got a question, when are you Catholics going to let those CofC'ers realize that their singing is a style invented by Catholics?

It was, actually, invented by Jews.

Assuming of course that synagogue singing was non-instrumental, as distinct from Temple worship......

HRoberson,

Hi, What are all the letters after your name - I think I know a couple.

Thanks, Elaine

[papist1]

Why did you start attending a catholic church after being a born again for 9 years?

I converted after attending over 18 diferent "bible churches (and other denoms of protestantism).

I converted because of the seemingly schizophrenic interpretations from church to church on the same topic of doctrine. I finally asked God to show me his true church and went on to study the early church(first four centuries) and found that pretty much everyone was catholic. I was shocked at this, since no one told me these things and I was very  anti Catholic, as I was taught to  be by my brothers and sisters in Christ. I found that they had many misconceptions of the teaching in the church and once I read the teachings for myself, it was very clear that the Church was correct on all issues pertaining to faith and morals.

[Elaine]

Why did you start attending a catholic church after being a born again for 9 years?

I converted after attending over 18 diferent "bible churches (and other denoms of protestantism).

I converted because of the seemingly schizophrenic interpretations from church to church on the same topic of doctrine. I finally asked God to show me his true church and went on to study the early church(first four centuries) and found that pretty much everyone was catholic. I was shocked at this, since no one told me these things and I was very  anti Catholic, as I was taught to  be by my brothers and sisters in Christ. I found that they had many misconceptions of the teaching in the church and once I read the teachings for myself, it was very clear that the Church was correct on all issues pertaining to faith and morals.

Whoa, "demons of protestantism" - those may be fightin' words for some here. I'm basically a pacifist- so I'm ok with your feelings.
I agree the 'schizo interpretations from church to church.'  In fact I just heard my pastor on his 6 am TV prog. say - he used to go to Denver to find a church preaching the Word - and all he got was a speeding ticket. You are correct - I know someone that said it took her 30 years to find a church !! I'm still lol.

I say - great you found a place you love. Catholics are beautifully devout people.  I have my own issues with the Church itself - but I should be quiet -I'm just learning some eye-opening things.

My connection is to Jesus, The Father and Holy Spirit, with the help of the Bible.   
It's me and my Creator all the way, not me, a church, a priest,a pastor, Creflo, rosaries, Max's books, Joyce's CD's and then God all the way.  That's just me. But, I love all of the above, don't get me wrong.:)

Pretty soon Catholics may be able to pray to Bishop Fulton J. Sheen bec of the campaign to canonize him. ( Again, he confirmed me)  I'm going right to God  and Jesus.
Great thread, thanks to all, Elaine

[kensington]

Why did you start attending a catholic church after being a born again for 9 years?

I converted after attending over 18 diferent "bible churches (and other denoms of protestantism).

I converted because of the seemingly schizophrenic interpretations from church to church on the same topic of doctrine. I finally asked God to show me his true church and went on to study the early church(first four centuries) and found that pretty much everyone was catholic. I was shocked at this, since no one told me these things and I was very  anti Catholic, as I was taught to  be by my brothers and sisters in Christ. I found that they had many misconceptions of the teaching in the church and once I read the teachings for myself, it was very clear that the Church was correct on all issues pertaining to faith and morals.

Then you missed it... for the TRUE Church are those who's names are "Written in the Lamb's Book of Life"...   Of whom only Jesus Christ is worthy to open...   not those who are sitting or kneeling in any pew. 

No religion or church or denomination holds the "ROLL" on who is and is not the Church, the body of Christ, those saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.  If they say the do, they lie.

[sopranette]

I have a question:  why  so many Catholics think God needed Mary's egg to create Jesus in her womb?  We already know from the story of Adam's creation He needs no such thing?

love,

Sopranette

[broach972]

I have a question:  why  so many Catholics think God needed Mary's egg to create Jesus in her womb?  We already know from the story of Adam's creation He needs no such thing?

love,

Sopranette

I think you may have answered your own question.  Why use Mary at all?  Why didn't Jesus just simply "appear" on earth as a grown man?  Why enter this world through a virgin birth?  I think it is important to note that Jesus was both fully divine and fully human.  I guess it is right to assume that Jesus developed in the way any normal child would develop--from an egg.

[sopranette]

I believe this is the first miracle Jesus performed, being born of a virgin.  Also, it continued His lineage back to King David.  However, I don't believe lineage is passed on through the egg of the mother, just being naturally born through her is enough.

love,

Sopranette

[CDHealy]

Jesus was formed from Mary's egg, because it was the only way he could be human like us: he got his humanity from us.  If God had created Jesus' humanity de novo, Jesus wouldn't have been human like us, but something else altogether.

And if Jesus isn't fully human like us, excepting sin alone, then we cannot be saved.

[sopranette]

So Adam was not human like us?  We are formed in God's image, not in eachother's.

love,

Sopranette

[CDHealy]

So Adam was not human like us?  We are formed in God's image, not in eachother's.

love,

Sopranette

Forgive me, I thought it would be clearer to you.

Yes, Adam was/is fully human, but for Jesus to be human like us (including the effects of the Fall of Adam), he had to take on our fallen human nature. And since the fall the only way to come into existence as a human is to do so biologically (i.e., be conceived, gestated and birthed), not by special creation as was Adam and Eve.

Jesus, as the epistle to the Hebrews points out again and again, had to have all the human things we have, excepting sin, including the ability to die.  The only way to be fully human was to be born.  And the only way that could happen was to have a woman's egg fertilized.

But the one thing unlike us is that Jesus was fully divine.  And so Mary's egg was fertilized not by human sperm but by miraculous intervention of the Holy Spirit.  Only in this way could Jesus be both *fully* human and *fully*divine.

If Jesus wasn't/isn't human like us, then we aren't saved.  Period.

[sopranette]

I understand why Jesus needed to have a real flesh and blood body, why He was born through the body of Mary, that He was both human and divine. I just don't understand why God would need anything from Mary to accomplish this.  Since the creation of Adam and Eve, true, the only way for the rest of us to come into existence is to be conceived using sperm and egg, but if God chooses to make a flesh and blood body, He does not need either of these two things. Sin nature is not carried by the egg and sperm per say, but through our flesh.

love,

Sopranette

[DCR]

So Adam was not human like us?  We are formed in God's image, not in eachother's.

love,

Sopranette

For what it's worth, Genesis 5:3 suggests that Seth was born in Adam's image.  Of course, given that Adam was made in God's image, it follows that anyone made in Adam's image would also be in God's image.

[sopranette]

Hmmm, maybe there are verses where it says our sin nature is passed on through the seed.  I don't know. Anyone?

love,

Sopranette

[DCR]

Sin nature

Now, you're opening a whole other can of worms.  

[stevehut]

If Jesus wasn't/isn't human like us, then we aren't saved.  Period.

Hey, I can agree with that.   

[DCR]

Hmmm, maybe there are verses where it says our sin nature is passed on through the seed.  I don't know. Anyone?

love,

Sopranette

I don't agree with the concept of the "sin nature," and it isn't something that is "passed down."  We're sinful only because we sin... not because of a nature we inherited.  If we had a "sin nature," then it would be because God created us with it, since we are His creation.  That would make God the author of sin, if He created us with a "sin nature."

[sopranette]

I agree, but that is a Catholic term, so I'm going along with it for now.

love,

Sopranette

[DCR]

I agree, but that is a Catholic term, so I'm going along with it for now.

love,

Sopranette

I see.  Actually, this is the reason behind the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.  I think Roman Catholics believe that Mary's birth was miraculous, in that she was supernaturally born free from sin (according to the inherited sin nature)... so that she would be sin-free when Jesus was born.  As CDHealy will probably point out, I believe the Orthodox disagree with Catholics on this particular doctrine.

[CDHealy]

There is no such thing as a "sin nature."  Humans have only one nature, created by God: human nature.

Human nature has been disfigured, but it is still the image of God in us.

The disfigurement of our human nature means we are born with an inclination (not an irresistible inclination, we are not irresistibly compelled to sin by anyone or anything) to sin.  We can resist that inclination, of course, since we have free will.  But the mortality that we inherit from Adam weakens us and our ability to resist sin.

DCR is right: we only sin because we each choose to.  Due to our fallen (not sin or sinful) nature, it is easier for us to choose to sin (just as it is easier to run downhill than up), but it is still our choice (just as we can still run uphill of we choose to).

And yes, DCR is correct, Orthodox have a slightly different (but significant in impact) understanding of "original" (or as some prefer "ancestral") sin.  Catholics understand the impact of original sin to be the inheritence of moral (or personal) guilt as well as of mortality.  Orthodox understand the impact to be of mortality but not the imputation of moral (or personal) guilt.

Because of the Roman Catholic understanding of original sin, it logically follows that they have to do something with Mary, since she would transmit moral (or personal) guilt to Jesus if such were inherently part of fallen human nature.  So Mary becomes the great exception to original sin.  (This creates other problems, but I won't go into that.)

Orthodox, however, since we reject the imputation of moral (or personal) guilty from original sin, do not need to posit anything different for Mary.  We teach that redemption has two components: the salvation from mortality (death), and the salvation from personal sin.

[CDHealy]

Sin nature is not carried by the egg and sperm per say, but through our flesh.

I agree with you.  I think it's horrible theology to locate sin, or just mere fallenness, in the egg or sperm.  But we do not get our flesh apart from a fertilized egg.

[DCR]

Of course, when we start talking about "fertilized eggs," we've now entered a modern clinical discussion.  I'm not sure folks had even a sufficient understanding of this for our modern scientific assertions to make sense in times past.

But, I do think this verse is significant in that regard:

Genesis 3:15

And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her seed;
He shall bruise you on the head,
And you shall bruise him on the heel.

This may be the first Messianic prophecy... notice the allusion to Jesus as "her seed."  So, I believe that it is reasonable and important to understand that Jesus was genetically Mary's Son.

[Jimmy]

Hmmm, maybe there are verses where it says our sin nature is passed on through the seed.  I don't know. Anyone?

love,

Sopranette

The phrase "sin nature"  is not even found in any translation that I know of except the NIV.  That translation has a preconceived theology all wrapped up in it.  No other translation presents the sin nature as passed on through the seed.  It is another of those interpretations that gets wired in, not because of what the Bible says, but because what some group of theologians believe preconceptually.

[CDHealy]

Jimmy, I couldn't agree with you more.  The NIV mistranslation of sarx as "sinful nature" is heretical.

[CDHealy]

Of course, when we start talking about "fertilized eggs," we've now entered a modern clinical discussion.  I'm not sure folks had even a sufficient understanding of this for our modern scientific assertions to make sense in times past.

But, I do think this verse is significant in that regard:

Genesis 3:15

And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her seed;
He shall bruise you on the head,
And you shall bruise him on the heel.

This may be the first Messianic prophecy... notice the allusion to Jesus as "her seed."  So, I believe that it is reasonable and important to understand that Jesus was genetically Mary's Son.

It is the first Messianic prophecy, and your conclusion is sound!

[sopranette]

Okay, that's good enough for me.  Thanks, everyone!

love,

Sopranette

[RAMS]

I am interested in starting a friendly discussion about the similarities and differences between Protestant doctrine and Catholic doctrine; I also hope to clear up any misconceptions about the Catholic Church, along the way.  My purpose here is not to talk anyone into becoming Catholic, to attack anyone's faith, or to engage in any conversation that isn't educational in nature.  For the record, I believe any person who has a personal relationship with Christ and is in agreement with the Nicene Creed is a Christian - so please do not ask me if you have to be Catholic to be Christian.

It is also important to let you know that I reconciled to the Roman Catholic Church about 6 years ago after about 15 years as a born again Christian in a Protestant tradition.

Finally, I am hardly the last word on Catholicism, if you are Catholic please feel free to answer any questions, enter into dialog, or add to any of my comments.  In the end, the Catholic Catechism is the best way to find accurate information on all Catholic teachings.

blessings

Plead the incredible tome and #1 bestseller, 1491

http://www.charlesmann.org/Book-index.htm

In Archeology and Anthropology alone, it is prolix in finding the Catholic regime is the absolute darkest belief foistered by terror and wholesale murder upon the human race, and it is anything but remotely Christian.

But, it is a triumph throughout Latin America and where I traffic there is the grandest dissent and defection away from this dark creed over to the Christ Based belief system of the Bible than ever before.

Behold this wonder of fact, against the apologist of such darkness.

Robert

[sopranette]

Never mind the number of lives the Catholic church has saved with its strong anti-abortion stance.

love,

Sopranette

[Elaine]

But, it is a triumph throughout Latin America and where I traffic there is the grandest dissent and defection away from this dark creed over to the Christ Based belief system of the Bible ...

Robert, I couldn't really understand this sentence very well. Could you explain what you mean - I really need things spelled out in simple terms.
Sometimes I'd like to ask people to think of me as a high schooler or something - the simpler the better for my mind to grasp.

Then if there is a typo I'm really lost - -I'm sure above you meant Read the tome - not Plead the tome --right?  I'm not sure.

Thanks my brother, :)

[broach972]

 

[Charles Sloan]

Never mind the number of lives the Catholic church has saved with its strong anti-abortion stance.

love,

Sopranette

I believe the Jehovah's Witness and Mormons also oppose abortion.

[sopranette]

Never mind the number of lives the Catholic church has saved with its strong anti-abortion stance. ::rollingeyes::love,Sopranette

I believe the Jehovah's Witness and Mormons also oppose abortion.

I am hoping to introduce a balance concerning Catholics here.  If Protestants are going to witness to Catholics, and lead some to Christ (if, in fact, they are lost to begin with ), they need to put aside some of their prejudices first and approach from a more loving and well informed place.  Calling people dark sided murderers is just going to result in the closing of more doors, and reach nobody.

love,

Sopranette