SPLIT: Catholic church and seemingly backward laws that conflict with the bible. Does anyone have any advice?


#1

This is all very confusing. I was raised catholic but lately I feel like my faith is being utterly tested as I struggle to get married in a Catholic church. As I do more research, I find out more about the Catholic church and seemingly backward laws that conflict with the bible. Does anyone have any advice? This in particular is disturbing:

jesus-is-lord.com/cath.htm

Help me please…


#2

I’d advise you to open a new topis to ask your questions - this is a post string from 2005.

:slight_smile:


#3

Split & Moved to Apologetics where it belongs. :slight_smile: [SIGN]Rock on![/SIGN]
MF


#4

The quick answer is to break up those “non-biblical teachings” into single threads.

Call no man father? Why does the author of this web-site fail to mention that Paul called himself a father to several of his disciples? Is Paul, in his inspired writings, non-biblical? I would take a look first at why Catholics do call priests “father” instead of taking this web-site for your Catechism.


#5

Bruin-

Start as many threads as you like…one topic per thread.

You’ll get answers for every question.

Let’s get started! :tiphat:


#6

Stop and think about it. :slight_smile: How come this person’s ideas are to be more trusted than the Church Christ himself founded?

Why would the Church that produced the Bible not know what the Bible says? Don’t you think the Magisterium (Church leadership) knows what these verses mean better than some guy who wasn’t there when they were written? The Church was there in the person of its Apostles and our bishops are their legitimate successors.

Such sites know nothing about the history of either the Bible or of the Church. They pluck verses out both textual and historical context and declare they know what they mean. What they are actually doing is applying a literalistic reading to verses instead of understanding them within their context, the author’s intent, or the teachings of the Church that PRE-DATE the New Testament.

The NT is the witness of the Church, not the other way around. Keep that firmly in mind and don’t read any more propaganda like that site, written by know-nothings with an anti-Catholic agenda.


#7

Well what a blessing that you have decided to learn your faith better now as you are an adult who is looking into the serious vocation of marriage which, is a sacrament and a serious undertaking.
I can only guess, that if you are having a “struggle” to get married in the Church that the Church likely has some very good reasons for making it so.
It is never too late to learn things, so hopefully you will embrace the lifelong “struggle” to learn your faith to the best of your ability.:slight_smile:

Why is your profile marked “NA” for religion? :confused:


#8

Good. Struggling is good for you. This faith you speak of that you have - is it ready for a struggle? It should be by now. Perhaps this is God’s way of waking you up that you need to strengthen your faith :yup: Be not afraid…

As I do more research, I find out more about the Catholic church and seemingly backward laws that conflict with the bible. Does anyone have any advice? This in particular is disturbing:

jesus-is-lord.com/cath.htm

Help me please…

I would be glad to help. First piece of advise: consider the source. You call that website research? That site is, well, laughable. Fortunately you have come to the right place to learn how easy it is for those who hate the Catholic Church to mislead uninformed Catholics. Any loser can post whatever they want on the internet. But the main issue to be dealt with is, “By what authority do you claim these truths?” The answer you will be given is that the authority is the “word of God”, the Bible. The problem is that the bible is a gift that God gave to the world through the Catholic Church. You won’t find that on your little website - they’ll just speak as if they personally know the bible to be “God’s Word” when, in fact, the truth of the Bible as God’s word was revealed by nothing other than the authority of the Catholic Church.
Now, if you think I am dodging addressing the actual issues that they raise, you are mistaken. I will gladly address each and every one of them *from the Bible *itself because the truth is that Scripture is totally consistent with the Catholic faith. So pick a topic and lets get rollin…


#9

Hey…am I the only one who sees another incarnation of the infamous Boettner List?

That has been soundly refuted here.


#10

Please take this as what it is - my genuine suspicion. From my perspective, it appears that the RCC never intended for the Bible to get off the pulpit and into layman’s hands. Think about it. It was in Latin, no one could read. People attended Mass and were preached to…told what to believe.

Then the reformers…now the RCC has to try and defend some of its belief’s that contradict scripture (or appear to).

I look at my Catholic upbringing as an example. Never do I remember anyone of authority (church, Catholic school) ever tell me to read my Bible. Then when I do; WOW! So just speaking from my experience but would explain why some CC doctrines contradict (or appear to) scripture. It was never intended for the layman to have access to the Holy Scriptures.

For example, I guess the person that started this thread…if they had been brought up to read the Bible and explain doctrine etc…it wouldn’t all of a sudden be a surprise. But it seems like it is all a secret. In fact, just trying to figure out the Catechism is a task.


#11

Did Jesus instruct the apostles to “teach to all nations”, or to distribute bibles to all Nations?

Did he say “I will build my Church” or “I will build my Bible”?

And yes, the more people read the bible without a guide, the more denonimations spring up.

In Christ!


#12

That’s bunkum. Answer me this? How many people could read prior to the advent of the printing press?

Answer me this. How were copies of the Word of God made? (Go ahead, say it, copied by hand.Which only took about a year…)

The printing press came in to being in the 1440s. The first Bible that was printed by Gutenberg in 1455 was a Catholic one in Latin with 73 books.
LINK

They flatter themselves with the idea that it was the knowledge of the Scriptures which produced the blessed Reformation the world over; and will tell you that it was all because the Holy Book was scaled and locked and hidden away from the benighted Papists in Continental countries that the glorious light of the Reformation never broke, and has not yet broken, upon them. There are, however, unfortunately for them, facts at hand, facts unquestioned, which explode this pious notion. The facts are these:—(i) As was shown long ago in the Dublin Review (October, 1837), ‘it was almost solely in those countries which have remained constant to the Catholic Faith that popular versions of the Bible had been published; while it was precisely in those kingdoms, England, Scotland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway, where Protestantism acquired an early and has maintained a permanent ascendancy, that no printed Bible existed when they embraced Protestantism. Holland alone and a few cities in Germany were in possession of the Bible when they adopted the Reformed Creed.’ Is it really the case then, you ask with open eyes, that these Latin countries allowed the Bible to be read and translated and printed before Luther? Listen and judge for yourself what rubbish is crammed into people’s heads. (ii) Luther’s first Bible (or what pretended to be the Bible, for he had amputated some of its members) came out in 1520. Now, will you believe it, there were exactly 104 editions of the Bible in Latin before that date; there were 9 before the birth of Luther in the German language, and there were 27 in German before ever his own saw the light of day. Many of these were to be seen at the Caxton Exhibition in London, 1877: and seeing is believing. In Italy there were more than 40 editions of the Bible before the first Protestant version appeared, beginning at Venice in 1471; and 25 of these were in the Italian language before 1500, with the express permission of Rome. In France there were 18 editions before 1547, the first appearing in 1478. Spain began to publish editions in the same year, and issued Bibles with the full approval of the Spanish Inquisition (of course one can hardly expect Pro*testants to believe this). In Hungary by the year 1456, in Bohemia by the year 1478, in Flanders before 1500, and in other lands groaning under the yoke of Rome, we know that editions of the Sacred Scriptures had been given to the people. ‘In all (to quote from “M.C.L’s” useful pamphlet on the subject) 626 editions of the Bible, in which 198 were in the language of the laity, had issued from the press, with the sanction and at the instance of the Church, in the countries where she reigned supreme, before the first Protestant version of the Scriptures was sent forth into the world.’ England was perhaps worse off than any country at the time of the Reformation in the matter of vernacular versions of the Bible: many Catholic kingdoms abroad had far surpassed her in making known the Sacred Word. Yet these lands remained Catholic; England turned Protestant; what, then, becomes of the pathetic delusion of ‘Evangelical’ Christians that an acquaintance with the open Bible in our own tongue must necessarily prove fatal to Catholicism? The simple truth of course is just this, that if knowledge of the Scriptures should of itself make people Protestants, then the Italian and French and Spanish and Hungarian and Belgian and Portuguese nations should all have embraced Protestantism, which up to the moment of writing they have declined to do. I am afraid there is something wrong with the theory, for it is in woeful contradiction to plain facts, which may be learned by all who care to take the trouble to read and study for themselves.

(Cont’d)


#13

Then the reformers…now the RCC has to try and defend some of its belief’s that contradict scripture (or appear to).

You wish…You can’t even substantiate that with facts.

I look at my Catholic upbringing as an example. Never do I remember anyone of authority (church, Catholic school) ever tell me to read my Bible.

Should’ve paid closer attention maybe. I had the saintly example of my family. My Grandmother read and knew the Word of God better than anyone I have ever known. My mother only slightly behind her. My Dad was one of the best examples to a young kid I can imagine.

Then when I do; WOW! So just speaking from my experience but would explain why some CC doctrines contradict (or appear to) scripture. It was never intended for the layman to have access to the Holy Scriptures.

This is baseless (and biased) propaganda.

  1. Catholic teachings do not contradict the Bible.

  2. Once the machinery was invented to make it possible, the Catholic Church produced Bibles in the vernacular languages sooner than did the “reformers”.

  3. There has never been an effort to keep accurate versions of the Word of God out of the hands of people.

For example, I guess the person that started this thread…if they had been brought up to read the Bible and explain doctrine etc…it wouldn’t all of a sudden be a surprise. But it seems like it is all a secret. In fact, just trying to figure out the Catechism is a task.

Save it for the gullible and ignorant! :stuck_out_tongue:

If you had the courage and integrity to actually sit down with the Catechism and actually read and study it (especially the footnotes) you wouldn’t say such an ignorant and biased thing.


#14

From the article…

For a glimpse of the atrocities committed by the Roman Catholic religion, do a net search on the Inquisition or the Crusades. During the Inquisition, the Catholic religion killed millions.

Wrong!

Borromeo, who oversaw the volume, said that while there were some 125,000 trials of suspected heretics in Spain, researchers found that about 1 percent of the defendants were executed.

In Portugal, 5.7 percent of the more than 13,000 people tried before church tribunals in the 16th and early 17th century were condemned to death, he said. In many cases, courts ordered mannequins to be burned when the condemned escaped capture.

msnbc.msn.com/id/5218373/

The Author of the article you cited has discredited himself within a few sentences. He is either really stupid, or he is deliberately proliferating lies against the Catholic Church. May God have mercy on him!


#15

And the whole Crusades thing! This is something that is not refuted vigorously or often enough.

The Crusades were but one episode in a struggle, not only against militant Islam, but also against Norse and Mongol incursions, for the life of Western culture and European civilization.

Islamic forces were on the wane in Spain, having been pushed out of southern France (the "high water mark of Islam").  Now the Caliphate began to exert pressure on Byzantium, the cork in the bottle as it were, preventing Moslem forces entry into Europe from the East.  In response for assistance to alleviate that pressure, the first Crusade was launched in 1096, following the disastrous defeat of the Byzantines at Manzikert.

 The era of European history from about 711 to the late 1400's (Spain wasn't reunited under a single Christian monarch until 1492) is best viewed as an epic struggle for the survival of western civilization against the tide of Islam, almost like a world war. The Crusades were one offensive episode in a struggle upon which the survival of Europe depended, and the Church acted decisively to ensure the success of that struggle.

There's no denying that bad things happened during the Crusades.  In the heat of battle, bad things happen in all wars.  But, all in all, Europe survived.  Thanks largely to the efforts of the Church.

#16

I have lost count of the number of times I have read a post from someone who has only a few posts under their belt asking a seemingly innocent question about supposed wrongs of the Church. These people aren’t Catholic; they come from anti-Catholic sites and ask questions which they think will unsettle Catholics. If these people were genuinely seeking answers to their questions they would interact with the people who are trying to help them. Don’t be fooled by these people from anti-Catholic sites.


#17

This site can be debunked in their very first point of call no man “father”: What do THEY call the male person half responsible for their existance? Bill? Albert? FATHER, perhaps? So then, by their argument, anyone who refers to their biological father couldn’t possibly be a Christian and goes against the Bible and everything Jesus stands for.

Or maybe this site is just twisting around what Jesus said in an attempt to save people from the awful “cult” called Catholicism and lead them to an awful “cult” called Protestantism. :rolleyes:

:heart:


#18

Let them come! Every time I hear one of their foolish arguments against the True Church it only strengthens my faith.

You may be right about the OP, however one should not be quick to judge. We wouldn’t want to give the impression that we are unwelcoming (even of heretics) :wink:


#19

“jesusislord.con” is a hate site, written by liars who have no truth, don’t know Jesus and scourge Him and us with scriptures. Some people find this level of hate addictive, and seek out similar hate sites to get a bigger thrill from. Anti-catholicism is the crack cocaine of religionism, sold in the ghettos of fear and ignorance, as the hate cult dealers laugh all the way to the bank.


#20

I feel it’s best to err on the side of trust. If the person is being dis-honest, that’s his problem; not ours. Their questions are rarely unique, and chances are they are shared by others lurking on this site wanting to find the truth of our Church!!!

If the person is truly seeking answers, then thank God there are people here willing to trust in his searching and show him the true faith.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.