Ask A Catholic IV

[_random_]

Intriguing quote, could I have context for that? (It's obviously not polytheistic, but I don't know exactly what it means.) I suppose teachings from the EO would work too.

Here you are:

As, then, if a man should wish to see God, Who is invisible by nature and not seen at all, he may know and apprehend Him from His works: so let him who fails to see Christ with his understanding, at least apprehend Him by the works of His body, and test whether they be human works or God's works. And if they be human, let him scoff; but if they are not human, but of God, let him recognise it, and not laugh at what is no matter for scoffing; but rather let him marvel that by so ordinary a means things divine have been manifested to us, and that by death immortality has reached to all, and that by the Word becoming man, the universal Providence has been known, and its Giver and Artificer the very Word of God. For He was made man that we might be made God ; and He manifested Himself by a body that we might receive the idea of the unseen Father; and He endured the insolence of men that we might inherit immortality. For while He Himself was in no way injured, being impossible and incorruptible and very Word and God, men who were suffering, and for whose sakes He endured all this, He maintained and preserved in His own impassibility.

For what it's worth, you see something similar in the CCC, quoting Thomas Aquinas: "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."

 

[civ_king]

Here you are:

For what it's worth, you see something similar in the CCC, quoting Thomas Aquinas: "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."

And thus by becoming man, Jesus allowed us to more fully partake in him.

 

[Jehoshua]

Do the same rules with regards to being in a state of grace prior to receiving communion apply to adoration as well?

no

as to the quote from random, that is fundamentally in accord with Catholic teaching.

-

@ Jeelen

Spoiler :

the quote you asked for in regards to Christs promise to send the Holy Spirit to reveal truth is John 16:13

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

As to Catholic teaching I did not say it changes, I said it develops. By this I mean that what is already there remains and further understand grows from that, leaving that which has already been revealed untampered with. Not one of the 255 dogmas or the various things that are considered known with certainty have been revoked at any point. However from previous understanding other understandings have been revealed. To use an example papal infallibility developed from the understanding of the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church, ergo it cannot fall into religious error.

As to heresy it is abomination and I despise it because I despise sin (and heresy is a sin) and it disgusts me, it is the sin itself that disgusts, not the sinner, since the act and the person engaging in it are distinct. One therefore hates the sin and urges the sinner to return to virtue for the good of his soul, this is an act of love of neighbour because it would be supremely uncharitable to stand idly by while another puts his soul at grave risk. Jesus did precisely the same thing, as a friend of mine said, when asked what Jesus would do rememeber that going beserk and cleansing the temple of moneychangers is a valid option. Either way I also seem to recall that Jesus likewise rejected sin while loving the sinner, going amongst sinners to correct their ways which naturally involved chastisement.

As to who is a heretic though the Church has a definition for that, a material heretic is someone is someone who in good faith believes something contrary to the Catholic faith in ignorance of the true teaching. A manifest heretic is someone who in full knowledge of what the Church teaches on whatever point, then actively believes contrary. As such I am not saying that those that are called Catholics in name only are heretics, I am simply saying they are not upholding the faith properly and are lukewarm. Although that said some of them may be heretics, material or formal on a case by case basis using the Churches definition, say if some nominal Catholic somewhere professes to believe something contrary to the faith.

Also there are quite definitely manifest heretics within the establishment, indeed Pope Benedict calls them "professional Catholics, for whom the spring of faith flows only weakly" these I referred too in the section you quoted in your second last quote as those who advocate heresy within the Church

 

[Smellincoffee]

Today in a religously-themed discussion group, we talked about accountability and ways that churches try to establish it. A Catholic woman told us that her father was barred from receiving Communion after he opted to send one of his children to a public school instead of the local Catholic school. Does the church take its private schools that seriously, or is this an example of a bishop exceeding the bounds of his office?

 

[Takhisis]

Depending on the time, perhaps there was a church v. state quarrel going on. Now in the 21st century that bishop would be indeed exceeding the bounds of his office.

 

[NBAfan]

Today in a religously-themed discussion group, we talked about accountability and ways that churches try to establish it. A Catholic woman told us that her father was barred from receiving Communion after he opted to send one of his children to a public school instead of the local Catholic school. Does the church take its private schools that seriously, or is this an example of a bishop exceeding the bounds of his office?

Really depends on the situation. I know that there was great anti-catholic bigotry in America before.
What time period was this?

 

[Agent327]

Mr. JEELEN, how many times do we have to remind readers that this is not a 'tell Catholics what you think of them and their religion and how they should be' thread but just an 'ask Catholics questions' thread?

And what makes you think I was not born, baptized, and raised as a Catholic?

the quote you asked for in regards to Christs promise to send the Holy Spirit to reveal truth is John 16:13

But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

Thanks. It is actually mentioned some verses before as well.

Jesus did precisely the same thing, as a friend of mine said, when asked what Jesus would do rememeber that going beserk and cleansing the temple of moneychangers is a valid option. Either way I also seem to recall that Jesus likewise rejected sin while loving the sinner, going amongst sinners to correct their ways which naturally involved chastisement.

Sinners and heretics are not the same thing, I should think. And Jesus did not act against heretics, by the way; he chastized traders at the Temple.

Also there are quite definitely manifest heretics within the establishment, indeed Pope Benedict calls them "professional Catholics, for whom the spring of faith flows only weakly" these I referred too in the section you quoted in your second last quote as those who advocate heresy within the Church

Again, it seems to me that Benedict is not talking about heretics here. Dividing Catholics into true Catholics and ´heretics´ is a bit radical, to say the least.

 

[Jehoshua]

Sinners and heretics are not the same thing, I should think. And Jesus did not act against heretics, by the way; he chastized traders at the Temple.

Heresy is a sin, and thus heretics are sinners just as adulterers, blasphemers, murderers and other categories of individuals posessed of some sin are sinners. Considering heresy as separate from any other sin is a false dichotomy. I merely used the temple incident of Christ chastising sinners which considering the understanding of heresy as merely a form of sin is relevant in regards to saying that Christ chastised sinners, which indeed is a form of charity, there is nothing more uncharitable to stand idly by and not try and help a neighbour turn away from sin.

Again, it seems to me that Benedict is not talking about heretics here. Dividing Catholics into true Catholics and ´heretics´ is a bit radical, to say the least.

According to the definitions of the Church however anyone who rejects a teaching of the Church knowing full well what the teaching is and proclaims another teaching, is a manifest heretic. Manifest heresy is a grave sin. Anyone who in ignorance of the true teaching and in good faith believes a false teaching is a material heretic, this is considered a venial sin.

Benedicts quotation lamented some of those who make a living in the organisation of the Church (theologians, clergy, religious and lay workers) for whom the faith flows weakly. This is a broad category which includes people who are lukewarm (not necessarily heretics), all the way to manifest heretics within the organisational Church. I would guess that the pope does not call the group heretics to their face and uses the language he does because he wishes to maintain the unity of the Church, and because every little thing he says is on the public record.

-

Today in a religously-themed discussion group, we talked about accountability and ways that churches try to establish it. A Catholic woman told us that her father was barred from receiving Communion after he opted to send one of his children to a public school instead of the local Catholic school. Does the church take its private schools that seriously, or is this an example of a bishop exceeding the bounds of his office?

In the past in countries where protestantism was the majority religion and Catholicism was the target of societal dislike the Church considered that it was sinful to send a child to an institution that would in all likelhood lead them away from the faith and expose them to the symptoms of the societal attitude of the day. Indeed its one of the reasons why, in Australia at least, when there was no funding for private schools that the Church made a massive effort to develop a comprehensive education system for Catholics, something which the other Churches and ecclesial communities did not do for their members.

Anyways In the present day considering such attitudes towards Catholics one would not be barred from communion for sending a child to a public institution, but at the same time its still considered preferential for parents to send their children to Catholic institutions in the interests of catechesis (the quality of which is another discussion and varies between schools) or for them to homeschool children in a properly Catholic manner.

 

[_random_]

Recently, the ROCOR announced that Alexander Schmorell will be canonized. I believe most of the other members of the White Rose Society were Catholic. Are any of them beatified or considered candidates for beatification?

 

[Smellincoffee]

Really depends on the situation. I know that there was great anti-catholic bigotry in America before.
What time period was this?

The lady in question is in her fifties or sixties, so -- depending on the age of the sibling in question -- this could have fallen anywhere from the late 1950s to the early 1970s, I would guess.

 

[Jehoshua]

Clemens August Graf von Galen was beatified and I believe he was involved in the white rose society. Indeed a sermon of his was the groups first pamphlet.

 

[Agent327]

Benedicts quotation lamented some of those who make a living in the organisation of the Church (theologians, clergy, religious and lay workers) for whom the faith flows weakly. This is a broad category which includes people who are lukewarm (not necessarily heretics), all the way to manifest heretics within the organisational Church. I would guess that the pope does not call the group heretics to their face and uses the language he does because he wishes to maintain the unity of the Church, and because every little thing he says is on the public

My guess would be that the Pope does not speak of heresy as it´s highly inappropriate in this context... As it was when you mentioned Jesus. Heretics may be sinners, but not all sinners are heretics.

 

[Jehoshua]

We are ALL sinners. However in regards to heresy, heresy is as I said a sin, so a heretic by virtue of the sin of heresy is a sinner (presuming we ignore all the other myriad of sins that everyone does in their day to day lives). Indeed it is a given that not all sinners are heretics and i never said they were.

As to what is appropriate that depends on who defines what is appropriate. A lot of people would consider a non-liberal christian saying that other religions are false. To a christian it is quite appropriate, as we are dutybound to spread the good news of Christ to all people, and to bring them out of error into truth. You may find it innapropriated that I mentioned an incident involving Christ in relation to the chastisement of sinners, many other people would not consider that so innapropriate.

As to the pope, Its not so much about heresy, indeed the pope has in several instances publicly spoken on the necessity of the "rod" of discipline to correct error within the Church and lamented the acceptance of heresy in some quarters of the establishment. In this context however bluntly saying that many people within the Church hierarchy are heretics would possibly cause schism and further incite them to move away from the Catholic Faith. The popes job is to maintain the unity of the Church and as such in this specific instance simply stating fact, although appropriate in the sense that it is true, would be counterproductive in light of his role, and would damage the gradual efforts to bring the wayward parts of the establishment back into line (which indeed is happening, you tend to find that the majority of younger clergy and religious are more orthodox than their forebears [this being in the west, this isn't so much of a problem elsewhere in the world])