Bluelighters views on the Catholic Church: are u one of us? Do you like us-hate us-pity us-whatever us and if so why?

[SpiralusSancti]

I m not completely ok with basically no institution, but if the Guy left a Church and not a Book (sorrry Protestants) there probably is a reason..I try to use the institution rater than being used, one of the Titles of the Pope is "Servus Servorum Deo "( Servant of the Servants of God) ad I take it quite literally....

Well in a biblical sense Chruch is simply wherever and whenever there are believers. Idea of a single highest authority among members of Church is politic, politic of institution and even within institution there are varying views on that.

 

[RDP89]

@ageingpartyfiend I see your point mate, but I have also seen people who changed their life for the better because of religion, ones that are shit even if they have religion image if they did not ( i.e. myself) and yes, people who should be better doing crack for all the good religion is doing to them....Religion is a powerful tool and should be handled with care

I Thank God for many things, especially because differently from my amico @JustferFun my family was very light Catholic and I never went to Catholic school and stuff and I have been away from His Church from when I was 12 to when I was 26-27, "mature" enough to not mix the messenger and the message. I considered myself "generically Christian " from my 19s-20´s but going back to the Church was way more difficult , I studied Catholic Theology and Philosophy and ...it made sense even if I did not want to! People should know more about it, not having the thing taught by sado priests and nuns bigoted parents and relatives etc....
by the way @JustferFun gay people as gay people don t "go to Hell", homosexual acts are a sin but so it s any sexual act outside of marriage, no discrimination we are all sinners People lie to think that homosexuality is a super sin because the sin of the others are always worse than urs....

Well according to the Bible homosexuality is punishable by death by stoning, that sounds pretty serious to me.

 

[skipjames]

Well according to the Bible homosexuality is punishable by death by stoning, that sounds pretty serious to me.

YEp but a) For Christians the Old Testament should be read in light of the New Testament that supersedes the Old in a number of ways ( for instance in the OT adulterous women were to be stoned as well, as you might remember Jesus begged to differ); b) Catholics and Orthodox ( aka the 2000 years old Churches)believe in Scripture AND Tradition ( the Dogmatic Councils, the teachings on how to correctly interpret the Scriptures etc) not in "Sola Scriptura" (Bible alone) or in the Biblical literalism which unfortunately is way too common in the USA. This is why Saint Augustine had no problem with evolution in the...5th century while some illiterate fundamentalist "pastor" have in...2023. Here s the Official Teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality

"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition." http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm

PS : objectively disordered is a technical term, it does not mean stuff like "mental disorder". Any sexual activity which is not unitive and procreative is "disordered" according to this view (i,e, sex outside of marriage)

 

[skipjames]

Well in a biblical sense Chruch is simply wherever and whenever there are believers. Idea of a single highest authority among members of Church is politic, politic of institution and even within institution there are varying views on that.

Sure but even in the Acts of Apostles you can see a structure (u have the Apostles which were basically the first bishops , u have the the presbyters etc ) not that different from the "visible" Church we have today.

 

[RDP89]

@skipjames What is the reasoning behind the New Testament superceding the Old Testament? I’m genuinely curious. I mean did Jesus not say in Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them”? Now admittedly I’m not a biblical scholar by any means, so perhaps I’m missing something, but isn’t the Bibles supposed to be the infallible word of god? Isn’t Jesus coming and correcting things admitting there were mistakes? And what are the specific passages of the New Testament that modern Christians use to justify throwing out parts of the OT which are no longer socially acceptable?

 

[skipjames]

@skipjames What is the reasoning behind the New Testament superceding the Old Testament? I’m genuinely curious. I mean did Jesus not say in Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them”? Now admittedly I’m not a biblical scholar by any means, so perhaps I’m missing something, but isn’t the Bibles supposed to be the infallible word of god? Isn’t Jesus coming and correcting things admitting there were mistakes? And what are the specific passages of the New Testament that modern Christians use to justify throwing out parts of the OT which are no longer socially acceptable?

I m not a Biblical Scholar either so take this with the benefit of the doubt but the idea is that the Scriptures are INSPIRED by God, are not the verbatim Word of God as is the case with the Quran according to Muslims . The Biblical writers did their best to make up their mind with the mistery of God but they were still men of their times with all their limitations. The Catechism says it better "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,"94 the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love". One of Christ´ ways of "fulfilling the prophets and the Law" was also to explain and expand the real meaning behind the OT (.e. the various "You heard that it was written...but I am telling you" you can find in the Gospels). Does it make any sense?

 

[SpiralusSancti]

Sure but even in the Acts of Apostles you can see a structure (u have the Apostles which were basically the first bishops , u have the the presbyters etc ) not that different from the "visible" Church we have today.

Well, that’s really stretching it.

Every person upon becoming full member of Curch has potential to get “special powers” like Apostoles. Like many saints supposedly did. So I still don’t accept Curch as an institution is anything but an ancient power struggle.

Unrelated to this. What I don’t like with many Church members is either ignorance or unacceptance of fact that Christians are one of 3 Abrahamic religions, and Catholics further branching from Abraham. To be more specific I find it immature to be positive about claims that Jesus is God and not a prophet or a man who got enlighten. Muslims have no problems with accepting Jesus as prophet and even his mother as very important figures, while hardly any Christian thinks so of Muhammed. It’s not only confined to Abrahamic religions, it’s also spreads to Buddhism (all who accept Budha as good path accept also Jesus as a good path), Hinduism and to just about any significant religion. On the other hand, most Christians think they have patent or something, on spiritual world and afterlife.

 

[SpiralusSancti]

@skipjames What is the reasoning behind the New Testament superceding the Old Testament? I’m genuinely curious. I mean did Jesus not say in Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them”? Now admittedly I’m not a biblical scholar by any means, so perhaps I’m missing something, but isn’t the Bibles supposed to be the infallible word of god? Isn’t Jesus coming and correcting things admitting there were mistakes? And what are the specific passages of the New Testament that modern Christians use to justify throwing out parts of the OT which are no longer socially acceptable?

Eye for an eye ≠ Turning other cheek
Stoning woman for infidelity ≠ Understanding hookers are cool too
Having to mutilate penis to enter heaven ≠ Not heaving to mutilate penis to enter heaven*

*this is a tricky one, as, many scholars claim so, in the infancy of Christianity there were 2 thoughts of dick, one that you have to be Jew to become Christian and other that won, that anyone can become Christian, therefore gaining bigger audience

There are countless others examples of upgrading old, savage way. Same like Judaism upgraded old ways of killing humans for sacrifice to only killing poor animals.

 

[Salem_is_tired]

I grew up in a not so religious, but somewhat believer household, (my mom always told me she believed in God, but she never really went to church or prayed) and went to a catholic high school because I had no other option due to the fact that at this point basically every high school in my hometown was under some kind of church.
To be honest, I never had strong feelings on the topic. I believe in the "live and let live" mentality. Until someone is not a edgy atheist or all mighty christian, belittling the other one because they don't agree wiht them, I usually don't mind any kind of religioin and believer around me - I often find myself having great conversation with people who has different views from mine, because yeah, even if I am not a hardcore atheist, I would label myself as a agnostic-atheist.
Since I was surrounded by all type of different christian growing up, I never really thought about "what makes a christian a christian" because it was always a spectrum for me - some christian make me sick, and I wan to vomit in my mouth, other ones are really sweet and add many great things to my life - therefore I always try to find out "what type of christian" I'm talking to.

 

[RDP89]

I m not a Biblical Scholar either so take this with the benefit of the doubt but the idea is that the Scriptures are INSPIRED by God, are not the verbatim Word of God as is the case with the Quran according to Muslims . The Biblical writers did their best to make up their mind with the mistery of God but they were still men of their times with all their limitations. The Catechism says it better "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,"94 the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love". One of Christ´ ways of "fulfilling the prophets and the Law" was also to explain and expand the real meaning behind the OT (.e. the various "You heard that it was written...but I am telling you" you can find in the Gospels). Does it make any sense?

That just seems to me like finding convenient ways to explain away contradictions after the fact.