One of the main priests at my last parish was from Viet-Nam(as an aside he was a really cool guy and he spoke 6 languages). The head pastor at one of my friends churches is from Nigeria...there is nothing wrong with having priests from developing nations join the ranks of priests in parishes in the US. I think if anything it gives American Catholics a broader view.

:)

I was baptized in the Church very shortly after I was born, in accordance with the traditions of the time. Still have my baptismal certificate. Never did First Communion nor was I confirmed. My family wasn't much into regular church attendance - weddings, baptisms and funerals is about it.

While I have great respect for the teachings of the Church, there are certain ones that I don't particularly care for. Most of you know that I am an active Freemason, and that already puts me in a 'state of grave sin' with the Church and I may no longer receive Holy Communion, so long as I maintain my membership in the fraternity. I firmly believe Freemasonry is NOT a religion, and its teachings do not contradict with my personal belief in God. Sorry, Your Holiness, but that's a decision I made, and it's non-negotiable.

I won't go into detail on my personal stance over abortion and birth control, because I don't need to start a firestorm on GC.

This is a 'discussion' on the Roman Catholic Church ordaining women. What has Anglicans not being Christian have to do with their ordaining women? (And I'm NOT saying that Anglicans are not Christians because they are a Protestant Christian denomination). All I have said is that Protestant denominations are not embracing the fullness of Truth given to us by Jesus.

And you are a baptised Christian, but you are not a Catholic. There are three Sacrements of initiation into the Catholic Church - Baptism, Holy Communion, and Confirmation. You don't have to agree with any of the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church because you are not under her authority. If you choose to be Confirmed and recieve Holy Communion through the RCIA program, then you are bound to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

Anglicans are Protestant, yes, but many Protestants view high church services as being very "catholic." A Toronto-area girls' school was founded, apparently because they thought the existing Anglican schools (such as my alma mater) were too "smells and bells", or, in other words, too "high church" or "catholic" for their liking. Mind you, this was in the late 1800s.

And from what I have beent told, 'High Services' are very similar to Roman Catholic (I'm assuming that is what you mean by 'catholic'). HOWEVER, there are still GREAT doctrinal differences (the Eucharist being the main one with valid Holy Orders being another) which makes the Anglican Church Protestant and not Catholic.

I think this thread is awesome, but can someone tell me, SERIOUSLY, why he or she would possibly give a rat's ass if someone on the interweb thinks he or she isn't really XYZ religion or that he or she is sinning or will go to hell or whatever?

I'm Catholic because I have recieved Baptism, Confermation, and Holy Communion.

I choose to exercise my judgement and intelligent to evaluate whether the teachings past and present are valid for myself and for my Church. Just as you have chosen in some part what teachings to follow so have I - however we both practice the same faith, and adhere to the same core teachings... if not practices. For example I do not believe in the infalibility of the Pope (temporal and secular) because the weight of history proves that wrong on so many levels.

I did some checking with family and friends within the Church... and all I have to say where hestitant about aspects of the "orthodox" movement within the Church - not the movement itself, but the people that it tends to attract...

However I think it is more important to reach out to members of the Church that may be going astray, instead of pushing them away by denying their faith in the Church.

VERY GOOD POINT. I don't see how "Catholic" it is to tell people that they're not Catholic. WWJD? Certainly not talk down to people and insult them b/c they didn't follow every single thing to the letter.

BTW, what person out there is able to follow the church to a T? No on is infalliable. Surely each and every one of us has broken many of the commandments. Or else what would the real need for confession be?

I do want to know what kind of Catholic forcefully pushes people away like this? Is that part of being Orthodox???

My late grandmother (requiescat in pace) would have said otherwise. Good reason why I profess myself to be a 'lapsed' Roman Catholic. However, I still consider myself to be one, even though I may not strictly adhere to the tenets of the Church. I could have converted a long time ago to Episcopalian, but considering how I rarely attend any church services or other religious activities, it would not have been worth it.

'Nuff said on my part.

=====================

As I recall reading, back in the 60s before I was born, Paul VI and Canterbury agreed that the argument over Transubstantiation v. Real Presence was an exercise in semantics and that in essence both positions meant precisely the same thing.
I further recall JPII saying that the Cramner ordinations were probably invalid but that since the Oxford movement of the mid-nineteenth century virtually all CofE priests and bishops had insured the validity of their orders via conditional reconsecration and reordination through Orthodox and Old Catholic lines of Apostolic succession. American Episcopal clergy who could likewise demonstrate Apostolic succession were recognized by Rome as well. Most Anglican priests are considered valid but not in communion with Rome. Which brings us to another interesting point. A few years back JPII invited Anglicans who professed belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist to receive the Sacrament in RC masses when no Anglican church was reasonably convenient. These points were confirmed to me by the late Basil Cardinal Hume, OSB when I was studying in England and would from time to time serve his Mass at Westminster Cathedral and also by Fr Tracy SJ and Fr Beattie SJ provincial superiors of the Jesuits where I used to serve the Latin High Mass at Farm Street Church (the Church of the Immaculate Conception, Jesuit HQ for England).
Cardinal Hume used to say that Anglicans were not really Protestants but were "seperated bretherin" and not seperated by all that much. He went on to say that reconcilliation beter served Christ's intentions than confrontation since the price of redemption was paid by Jesus for all, not just for some.

Actually, many if not most Anglicans would consider Anglicanism a bridge between Protestantism and Catholicism -- sort of a "both" and "neither."

ETA:Opps. Just read dekeguys posy above, which puts it better than I did.

Now, I'm not trying to take it out of context, but I don't quite remember anywhere in the New Testament where Jesus says, "Say a prayer to my mother and ask her to pray for you" nor do I recall any passages about the saints - I would assume 'cuz there weren't any at the time? And as MysticCat explained to me once about my own religion: "The older Protestant groups -- the Lutherans, Presbyterians and Anglicans -- all teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are received in the Sacrament. They may disagree with each other (and with the Catholic Church) about how this happens, but they do teach that it does happen."

So I guess I've always been confused how men who made these rules and said they are the "truth of God revealed through Christ" came up with the rules when they aren't really discussed in the Bible? Like, did Jesus ever say, "Do not ordain women" or is it just that women weren't given any respect back then so they never got a mention? I also don't recall the Scripture of the Last Supper saying, "Do this in rememberance of me - but only if you are Catholic and have had your First Communion". I'm no biblical scholar, so maybe it's somewhere and I just don't remember it? :confused:

Seeing as though I'm dating a Protestant, I have a lot of heated discussions about religion. So much so, in fact, that I have a searchable copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church as my very first bookmark on my computer. Anyway, I searched for FRIDAY to discuss this fasting issue, and this is what I came up with:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c2a4.htm#1438

However, I go to a pretend Catholic university and am also apparently a pretend Catholic, so what do I know? ;)

Nice of you to remember. :)

And I could add that the Eastern Orthodox tend to the think we Western Christians (Catholic and Protestant) are chasing our own tails trying to come up with any explanation about exactly "how" the Real Presence happens. They would just say that debating transubstantiation vs. "in, with and under" vs. "whatever" is useless and misses the point. It's a mystery that we can't understand or explain -- we should just accept it and move on.

I am really enjoying this discussion. I’m a Protestant, but I have always held a fascination with Catholicism.

I’m having trouble understanding how you can be Catholic without accepting the prevailing doctrine and beliefs. I am aware of the doctrine and beliefs of my religious group. I accept them. Does accepting them as truth mean that I always adhere to them? No. For instance, my doctrine sets forth that premarital sex is wrong. Do I believe that? Yes. Do I always adhere to that? No. However, the difference is, I am constantly trying to. I believe that we are all sinners who are constantly striving to do better.

If you do not believe in the basic doctrines and beliefs of your religion, why do you still belong to that group? Tradition?

I think you hit on an important point - specifically that belief and adherance are two seperate things. Some would argue that belief is all that is necessary to be considered a member of a faith (well that and the rituals that may have been involved); while others hold that it is adherance that is determining factor of faith... to me you can believe, but be a "bad, lapsed, or failed" member of a faith because of lack of adherance - but you still believe and to me thats what matters.

Some of the arguements in this thread touching on doctrines and beliefs are a littled flawed - in that what is recognized as a belief, a doctrine, a practice, or a tradition may not be seen as the same by members within the RCC... herein is where the heart of the arguements and debates lie - what is a belief and what is a teaching? (believe me even with in the Church one is more binding than the other).... or as someone else pointed out what is a practice and what is a tradition?

Plus you are a liberal, so there's really no saving you!!! :p

And I can't say I don't agree with that!!!! :)

My priest gave a similar homily last night. He has a track record for not voting for the winning president in every election since the 60s. And he shared that he didn't vote for Bush. Does this make him less of an American?

Ok... so maybe it depends on who you ask... bad example. ;) :D

His point was that there are many who don't agree with the appointment of the new Pope. But it shouldn't make them less of a Catholic. (I'm slowly trying to bring up the Pope topic that disappeared on page 2 or so.)

And I've heard about fasting on Fridays during Lent only... but not year round. Don't know many that do observe that. And I've heard all sorts of combinations of fasting. You can eat meat after sunddown on Fridays during Lent... you can engage in your given up thing for Lent on Sundays... etc. I couldn't do food fasting for health reasons.

Perhaps my fast should be giving up GC on Fridays... :rolleyes:

I love my sorority alot. But, I would never compare my faith/religion to it. But since you brought it up, let's run with that. I love Alpha Kappa Alpha. I believe in the mission and ideals on which we were founded and stand. IF I didn't, I would not have expressed interest in AKA in the first place. As a member, as there rules that I do not care for? Yes. However, those are rules that may be changed and there are systems in place to allow for change. So, I would liken church beliefs and doctrines to the principles of my org, and policies to common practices.

Thanks for the feedback RACopper. I think I will have to do more research on beliefs/doctrine vs. tradition in the Catholic church

===============

May I add something here? In the RC church Scripture and Tradition are the bases of Doctrine. Tradition which traces back to the origin of the Faith is considered as valid as Scripture considering that the written word dates to about AD 100 and before that time there was no written New Testament. So, all New Testament scripture comes from Tradition anyway. It was word of mouth for some time before it was fully written down. This is one of the reasons why RCs believe the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit but is not the literal word of God. Also, since it has been translated several times into several different languages an exact translation was impossible. RCs believe that the Bible contains the message of God without being couched in His exact words. Tradition is viewed as equally valid for the same reasons.

THANKS!