Question for Catholics or those who have left the Catholic church

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Should churches provide a mechanism for release from sacred vows?

  • yes, they should

    Votes: 2 33.3%
  • no, they sholdn't

    Votes: 2 33.3%
  • why bother? Just leave.

    Votes: 1 16.7%
  • Don't join in the first place.

    Votes: 1 16.7%
  • Just "crash" church services like wedding crashers. There's no need to become a member.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    6
  • Poll closed .

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yehren notices:
No wonder you hate Catholics; you don't know anything about them.

Non-Catholics do not *hate* Catholics.

Most don't. You seem to be an exception. I'm just pointing out that the reason you hate us, is that you have a lot of odd misconceptions about what Christians are like. Generally, cults don't like Catholics. We feel sorry for them, just like everyone who is ensnared in any cult. Not saying you are, but you do exhibit some of the key characteristics.

The "cult of Mary?" You mean like this?

"God did not receive his divinity from Mary, but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother. … She is the true mother of God and bearer of God. … Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two Christs… just as your son is not 2 sons… even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone."

Or this?

"It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul, infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin."

Or this?

"We can use the Hail Mary as a meditation in which we recite what grace God has given her. Second, we should add a wish that everyone may know and respect her."

Nothing in any of this is contrary to Protestant theology.

And since everyone has access to the Catechism of the Catholic Church you cannot say *you don't know anything about them*. I have quoted extensively from the CCC as well as the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia to show Catholics that their unauthorized human priests literally sacrifice Christ on an altar in a bloodless Mass.

But you can't show us now? Why am I not surprised?

Here's what the Catechism says:
The Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church's offering. The terms holy sacrifice of the Mass, "sacrifice of praise," spiritual sacrifice, pure and holy sacrifice are also used,150 since it completes and surpasses all the sacrifices of the Old Covenant. ...
1365 Because it is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: "This is my body which is given for you" and "This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood."187 In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he "poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."188

1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:

[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.189
1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."190

1368 The Eucharist is also the sacrifice of the Church. The Church which is the Body of Christ participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she herself is offered whole and entire. She unites herself to his intercession with the Father for all men. In the Eucharist the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his Body. The lives of the faithful, their praise, sufferings, prayer, and work, are united with those of Christ and with his total offering, and so acquire a new value. Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering.


Not at all what you claimed it says. You can't serve God by peddling untruths.
 
Last edited:

Grams

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2017
1,509
1,080
113
88
brown city
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I was Catholic for some 50 years ........
And my self,,,, and all I knew at church were not saved !!!!!!!
The priest had to take care of our sins.................. WOW....

My husband and I were not !

I am still afraid my friend I brought to the church when we were children is not saved .....
She will not of course try another church..... That is the way I was back then.
 

Nancy

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2018
16,761
25,324
113
Buffalo, Ny
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Just wondering if anyone who has left the Catholic faith ever considered the possibility of being officially excommunicated. The reason I ask is because after being confirmed into the faith, one has made a solemn vow to keep and uphold the Catholic faith. To then just walk away seems like it would present a problem to people who aren't in the habit of breaking their vows.

Perhaps it matters why one leaves the church. If one were to discover some sort of subterfuge, this might warrant one to seek release from their vow; an annulment of sorts. The Catholic church has an annulment process for marriage vows, why not for annulling confirmation vows?

Myop,
Personally speaking, I was born and raised Catholic. When making my 1st Holy Communion, I had no idea what I was even doing, just knew I got to dress nice and have fun food for the day...did not know...all I remember of that day, was that their was a huge black spider on my quite silly and embarrassing Communion "dress", lol.
And all I remember of my conformation was pretty much the same...people gave you cards with money in them, maybe one or two of my parents friends would stop over with goodies...that is it.
So, I would say that if one had no clue what they were "vowing" to, they should graciously go to the leaders of said Church and say as much. Their own consciences should dictate their choice. If one finds relationship in another body...must mean that they are needed somewhere there, and will be fed better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus and Pearl

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Not even all Catholics are saved. And it's very possible to be saved, even if one is not a Catholic. Interdenominational rancor and hatred serves a master, but not the One we should be serving. Let it all go, and God will bless you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus

Grams

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2017
1,509
1,080
113
88
brown city
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Eph.2;
8

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9
Not of works, lest any man should boast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Eph.2;
8

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9
Not of works, lest any man should boast.


James 2:18 But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. [19] Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble. [20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? [22] Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? [23] And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. [24] Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?


How can this be? Is God contradicting himself? No, he isn't. For we are saved by grace through works, just as we are saved by grace through faith. We are justified by faith and works.

So what's the error here? Grace is the gift from God, not faith or works. It is by the grace of God that we have faith and works, both of which save.

 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Here's what the Catechism says:
The Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior


For some unknown reason, too many Catholics are unfamiliar with this fact, and will readily deny it, even to the point of claiming that it is a Protestant doctrine. I've seen this in Catholic bible studies repeatedly.
1365 Because it is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice.

This is a non sequitur. There is no such thing as a memorial that includes a body present or re-presented for sacrifice. Memorials, by definition do not include a body.

The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: "This is my body which is given for you" and "This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood."187 In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he "poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."188


This is essentially the fallacy of Begging the Question. The texts indicate that the author is using the figure Metaphor. We know this because the words "this" and "body" have the wrong articles modifying them. This is always a tell tale sign that the figure Metaphor is being used. The only other explanation is that the gospel writer didn't know what he was doing. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he goofed.

The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial


Again, a non sequitur. There are no bodies present at memorials.

...and because it applies its fruit:

[Christ], our Lord and God, by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.189


So they claim that it is "its memory perpetuated" while simultaneously "re-presented". This is a contradiction. It is incoherent.

The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."190

Then, by definition, it can't be a memorial.

]QUOTE]1368 Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering.[/QUOTE]


Which alter? The one in heaven, or the copy built by human hands?

You can't serve God by peddling untruths.

Quite true. Even if the doctrines are true, God is not served if the doctrines are not manifested in the world.
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
if one had no clue what they were "vowing" to, they should graciously go to the leaders of said Church and say as much.


Good idea, but what about those who could grasp the gravity of their vow? What about those who, with their limited knowledge of what they'd been taught, understood the value of their vow; yet later discovered the very teachings they had vowed to uphold to be false?

The church obviously doesn't see it this way so they aren't about to supply some mechanism of annulment for those who are presented with this moral dilemma.

Their own consciences should dictate their choice.

How is this any different than what the bible condemns as doing "what was right in their own eyes"?

If one finds relationship in another body...must mean that they are needed somewhere there, and will be fed better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Again, I hear echos of Paul pointing out that until the former has died, they are still bound by the law (e.g. the vow) until the former is dead, or they are released from their vow. Only the church can release them from their vow. They aren't doing that, and probably have no intention of doing so except for those who have already acquired the praise of men. Only those are worthy.
 

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States

For some unknown reason, too many Catholics are unfamiliar with this fact, and will readily deny it, even to the point of claiming that it is a Protestant doctrine.


Many Protestants also acknowledge Christ's words at the Last Supper. It's not only Catholics. And I've never met a Catholic who didn't understand that in the Mass, we are celebrating His sacrifice and resurrection. Some Protestants now say it's a myth, but most of them don't.

There is no such thing as a memorial that includes a body present or re-presented for sacrifice.

Jesus says otherwise:

Matthew 26:26 And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. [27] And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. [28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.

One of you is wrong. I don't think it's Him.


This is essentially the fallacy of Begging the Question. The texts indicate that the author is using the figure Metaphor. We know this because the words "this" and "body" have the wrong articles modifying them. This is always a tell tale sign that the figure Metaphor is being used.


He didn't say "this is a metaphor for my body", or "this is symbolic of my blood." And He says "do this in memory of me." Maybe it's time you accepted it His way?
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
James 2:18 But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. [19] Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble. [20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? [22] Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? [23] And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. [24] Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?


How can this be? Is God contradicting himself? No, he isn't. For we are saved by grace through works, just as we are saved by grace through faith. We are justified by faith and works.


This isn't saying anything. The reason being that you haven't clarified who's faith or works? When we speak of the works produced, they are by faith; not by the works themselves. When Paul states: "By grace through faith, and that NOT OF YOURSELVES, not of works, lest any man boast", he is spotlighting that it is not our faith, but Christ's faith operating which produces the "works" or "fruit". Faith is a work, but it is Christ's; not ours. The fact that faith produces works is beside the point when it comes to salvation. It is only important within the context of those who are not producing fruit. Paul's words are within the context of people who are producing works, and using those works to document their salvation. Paul simply points out that they do not document their salvation at all. James is pointing out that the faithful produce works, and are justified. James isn't pointing out that the just are justified by their works, only that they naturally and consequently must produce works.

Paul points out that not only can we not claim those works as our own, but we can't even claim the faith that produced them as our own.


So what's the error here? Grace is the gift from God, not faith or works. It is by the grace of God that we have faith and works, both of which save.

No, the error is in assuming that we have them. You have put the cart before the horse. It is Christ who has them. We are his possessions, not the other way around. Christ is not reconciled to us, we are reconciled to him. Paul is clear when he points out that it is the "faith OF Christ", i.e. Christ's faith, "not that of yourselves".

There is no self to possess this faith as the self has already been denied, crucified, etc. There is nothing left, but the new creature alive in, with, and through Christ's Spirit.
 

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
James 2:18 But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. [19] Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble. [20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? [22] Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? [23] And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. [24] Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?

How can this be? Is God contradicting himself? No, he isn't. For we are saved by grace through works, just as we are saved by grace through faith. We are justified by faith and works.

This isn't saying anything.

It's the Word of God. We'll just have to disagree on that belief.

The reason being that you haven't clarified who's faith or works?

Well, let's see what God says...

James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? [22] Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? [23] And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. [24] Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? [25] And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way?

Abraham's works and Rahab's works, for example. "Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?" Maybe it's time to let it be God's way.


When we speak of the works produced, they are by faith; not by the works themselves.

God has something to say about that, too...

James 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

He's talking to you.
 

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
There is no self to possess this faith

You've got that wrong, as well...

Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him: The first commandment of all is, Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one God. [30] And thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength. This is the first commandment. [31] And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

If we don't have a self, this statement is a joke.
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States

Many Protestants also acknowledge Christ's words at the Last Supper. It's not only Catholics. And I've never met a Catholic who didn't understand that in the Mass, we are celebrating His sacrifice and resurrection. Some Protestants now say it's a myth, but most of them don't.


Some Catholics also claim it is a myth, albeit without all the negative baggage that is associated with the term.



Jesus says otherwise:
Matthew 26:26 And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. [27] And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. [28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.


Again, Begging the Question. You're simply assuming that he's speaking literally. I've already pointed out that this can't be the case, and proven why. Again, the pronoun is always made to agree in gender with that noun to which the meaning is carried across, and not with the noun from which it is carried, and to which it properly belongs. This at once shows us that a figure is being employed; when a pronoun, which ought, according to the laws of language, to agree in gender with its own noun, is changed, and made to agree with the noun which, by Metaphor, represents it.

In our example, the pronoun, "this" (touto), is neuter, and is thus made to agree with "body" (swma), which is neuter, and not with bread (aptos, artos), which is masculine. This is always the case in Metaphors.


One of you is wrong. I don't think it's Him.

Neither of us is wrong. You're the one who is mistaken. You're not advancing an argument. You're just assuming what you intend to prove. This is the fallacy of Begging the Question.



He didn't say "this is a metaphor for my body", or "this is symbolic of my blood."

Correct. He literally says, "This represents my body". However, he doesn't speak literally, but figuratively by using the figure Metaphor. Again, we know this by the fact that the author is competent, and not a bumbling idiot who doesn't know how to make his pronouns agree in gender, number or case. The author also uses the wrong verb. The verb, (eimi), I am, or the infinitive of it, to be, means to be in the sense of signifying, amounting to. e.g. Mt.9:13, 'But go ye and learn what that means"
Mt.12:7, "But if ye had known what this means".
Acts. 10:7, "Now, while Peter doubted in himself what this vision should mean"

On the other hand, if an actual change is meant, then there must be a verb which plainly and actually says so; for the verb "to be" never has or conveys any idea of such a change.

The usual verb to express such a change is (ginomai), which means to be or become. Mk.9:39, 'There was(i.e. became) a great calm,"
Lk.4:3, "Command this stone that it be made (i.e. changed into) bread."
John 16:20, "Your sorrow shall be turned into joy." This was a real transubstantiation.

If Jesus had meant that the bread had become His body, that is the verb He would have necessarily used. The fact that He did not use it, but instead used the simple verb (eimi), i.e., "is" proves conclusively that no change was meant, and that only representation was intended.

From all this it is clear that the words, "This is my body" means "This (bread) represents my body." QED

Additionally, the figure Symbol is not the same or synonymous with the figure Metaphor.



And He says "do this in memory of me." Maybe it's time you accepted it His way?

Quite right. The reason he says to do this (i.e. celebrate the Passover) is because it is a memorial of their freedom from bondage. The added meaning is that it is not just from the bondage of slavery in Egypt, but from the chains of sin and death.

Again, there is no memorial with a body present. That is a funeral. You aren't celebrating a memorial. You're celebrating a funeral because you explicitly believe that Christ's body is being sacrificed in this ritual. It can't be both. You're still contradicting yourself.
 

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Starkle, starkle kleine Weichei,
wie ungewöhnlich und wie frei!
Heinrich Czolbe
 

shnarkle

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2013
1,689
569
113
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Is God contradicting himself? No, he isn't. For we are saved by grace through works, just as we are saved by grace through faith. We are justified by faith and works.



It's the Word of God. We'll just have to disagree on that belief.

Are you just ignoring what I'm posting, or engaging in pointless trolling? I'm not referring to the biblical citations. I'm referring to your comments. Here's what I'm explicitly pointing to: "Is God contradicting himself? No, he isn't. For we are saved by grace through works, just as we are saved by grace through faith. We are justified by faith and works."

That isn't the word of God. That is a not so sly interpolation of what the text actually states.



Well, let's see what God says...

Your quote doesn't address my point. I'm not denying that works are involved. James argument isn't the same as Paul's because James is talking to people who do NOT have works. Paul is talking to people who DO have works, and are claiming that their works justify them. See the difference?
 

Yehren

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2019
2,912
1,461
113
76
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Are you just ignoring what I'm posting, or engaging in pointless trolling? I'm not referring to the biblical citations. I'm referring to your comments. Here's what I'm explicitly pointing to: "Is God contradicting himself? No, he isn't. For we are saved by grace through works, just as we are saved by grace through faith. We are justified by faith and works."

That isn't the word of God. That is a not so sly interpolation of what the text actually states.

I showed you exactly what He wrote. You don't agree with it, because it contradicts your new doctrine. But it is the word of God.

Your quote doesn't address my point. I'm not denying that works are involved.

If you admit that we are saved by works as well as by faith, then you and God are back on the same page.

James argument isn't the same as Paul's because James is talking to people who do NOT have works.

That's not what he says. James is talking to all of us. He's saying faith without works is dead. You might as well not have faith if you don't have works. That's what Jesus says in Matthew 25. If you haven't helped the unfortunate, you're in with the goats.

But you seem to understand that none of it would be possible without His grace. Which is what Paul is saying. Our faith is not by our own doing, but by the grace of God. And our works are also by the grace of God.

Paul is talking to people who DO have works, and are claiming that their works justify them.

Let's see what God says...

James 2:24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?

God seems to think so. One is justified by works as well as by faith. See the difference?
 

Grams

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2017
1,509
1,080
113
88
brown city
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I guess some of you do not understand.....

There is a old Testament Genesis - Malachi -- And some of this is for the past

The New Testament - Matthew- Revelation -- Is for now and the future

We now have Grace .......................................!

Of course there are some things that are always the same....... I think most of us know this!

That is why reading the bible is good for us,,,, Plus having a good preacher of course that will explain
things we do not quite understand..........
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pearl