Lost, considering returning to Catholicism despite disagreeing with so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

No. Jesus started the Catholic Church and made Saint Peter the first Pope. Christianity was brought out of Palestine and into Rome and other places by Saint Peter and Saint Paul (born Saul). Early Christians were persecuted and forced into hiding. By the time Constantine became emperor, there were many Christians, including much of the Roman army, and it was probably as much a shrewd political move on his part as much as it was Divine revelation.

However, as much as you might want to talk about the Church leaders and what was set on which day, what is most interesting here are the people who were willing to have faith and endure persecution and even torture and death. Constantine likely really only made Christianity the official religion of Rome because so many people were following it already. The Catholic Church is, and has always been, formed by the masses of people who believe.

Yes, indeed -- the Catechism version!

I guess. This is the National Geographic, the DK science, the History Channel, and the existing primary source version as well.

I am not sure where the "Constantine made up Christianity to fit with pagan beliefs" version comes from.

I'm a Syrian Christian- we got the 1st church, I believe from St. Paul. We are the first gentle Christians. It was not Catholic, no pope. We eventually merged into Greek orthodox, then later broke away. Roman Catholicism did not begin until Emperor Constantine. And I believe he named himself the 1st pope.

Constantine certainly helped the Church prosper, but he was not, and never claimed to be, the first or any other Pope. Roman Catholics trace the foundation of the Church to Christ’s assertion that he would build his Church on the rock that was Peter’s profession of faith. Peter later became Bishop of Rome (Pope), where he died. Even today, Orthodox recognize the Bishop of Rome as first among equals, although they reject his claim of primacy. As for the Syrians receiving the faith from St. Paul, no doubt, but you will recall that as an Apostle called “outside the normal course” he was active separate and apart for a time from the other Apostles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

Yes, you're right, but Catholics do not learn that in Catechism, so some Catholics, like pp, think it doesn't count.

It “doesn’t count” because it didn’t happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

Yes, you're right, but Catholics do not learn that in Catechism, so some Catholics, like pp, think it doesn't count.

It “doesn’t count” because it didn’t happen.

the Roman Empire wholly coopted one of several small religious sects. Constantine saw christianity as a unifying force and he was right, but he could have just have easily chosen a dozed other religions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP if you’re still listening, I was in your position. The more liberal branch of Lutheranism (ELCA) worked for me. It felt like church (a lot of the same liturgy as Catholic) without the pedophilia, sexism, and social conservatism.

Nope, no sex abuse in the Lutherans.

“ Thore was pastor of St. Nicodemus for about 20 years in 2004, when he admitted to church officials that he had had inappropriate sexual contact with two boys in his congregation years earlier.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/buffalonews.com/news/local/lutheran-pastor-accused-of-abuse-says-he-lived-in-torment-over-any-wrong-he-committed/article_322b5b4a-3aad-5b37-be6b-e5f45937550f.amp.html

“Victims of a former Lutheran minister who sexually molested boys won a jury award of nearly $37 million Thursday, bringing the total payout in the case to about $69 million.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna4808590

Nice try, but the difference is that the ELCA doesn't have an organized hierarchy that used its power to cover up the crimes for decades.

I'm sorry that's hard for you to face.

Wow. And with a history going all the way back to 1987!

And if you really believe the ELCA has never tried to bury an abuse case I’m the one sorry for you.

And I’ll just leave this here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/us/abuse-by-clergy-is-not-just-a-catholic-problem.html

Not a single person has indicated that child sexual abuse exists only in the Catholic church. But by design, most Protestant denominations (including the ELCA) are not hierarchical. They're independent congregations. So, you're still wrong.

No, I’m still right because (1) the entire premise that the Roman Church is evil incarnate and bereft of authority because of sexual abuse is replete in the prior posts, both implicitly and explicitly; (2) the decentralized nature of many Protestant denominations makes them far less inviting targets than the gigantic, centralized in some ways, perceived to be wealthy Roman Church; and (3) your apparent point that decentralized denominations are better than the Roman Church because however corrupt any individual minister or branch might be, there is no central administration to be corrupted, is simply ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP if you’re still listening, I was in your position. The more liberal branch of Lutheranism (ELCA) worked for me. It felt like church (a lot of the same liturgy as Catholic) without the pedophilia, sexism, and social conservatism.

Nope, no sex abuse in the Lutherans.

“ Thore was pastor of St. Nicodemus for about 20 years in 2004, when he admitted to church officials that he had had inappropriate sexual contact with two boys in his congregation years earlier.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/buffalonews.com/news/local/lutheran-pastor-accused-of-abuse-says-he-lived-in-torment-over-any-wrong-he-committed/article_322b5b4a-3aad-5b37-be6b-e5f45937550f.amp.html

“Victims of a former Lutheran minister who sexually molested boys won a jury award of nearly $37 million Thursday, bringing the total payout in the case to about $69 million.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna4808590

Nice try, but the difference is that the ELCA doesn't have an organized hierarchy that used its power to cover up the crimes for decades.

I'm sorry that's hard for you to face.

Wow. And with a history going all the way back to 1987!

And if you really believe the ELCA has never tried to bury an abuse case I’m the one sorry for you.

And I’ll just leave this here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/us/abuse-by-clergy-is-not-just-a-catholic-problem.html

Not a single person has indicated that child sexual abuse exists only in the Catholic church. But by design, most Protestant denominations (including the ELCA) are not hierarchical. They're independent congregations. So, you're still wrong.

No, I’m still right because (1) the entire premise that the Roman Church is evil incarnate and bereft of authority because of sexual abuse is replete in the prior posts, both implicitly and explicitly; (2) the decentralized nature of many Protestant denominations makes them far less inviting targets than the gigantic, centralized in some ways, perceived to be wealthy Roman Church; and (3) your apparent point that decentralized denominations are better than the Roman Church because however corrupt any individual minister or branch might be, there is no central administration to be corrupted, is simply ridiculous.

so were the kids making it up to get money?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP if you’re still listening, I was in your position. The more liberal branch of Lutheranism (ELCA) worked for me. It felt like church (a lot of the same liturgy as Catholic) without the pedophilia, sexism, and social conservatism.

Nope, no sex abuse in the Lutherans.

“ Thore was pastor of St. Nicodemus for about 20 years in 2004, when he admitted to church officials that he had had inappropriate sexual contact with two boys in his congregation years earlier.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/buffalonews.com/news/local/lutheran-pastor-accused-of-abuse-says-he-lived-in-torment-over-any-wrong-he-committed/article_322b5b4a-3aad-5b37-be6b-e5f45937550f.amp.html

“Victims of a former Lutheran minister who sexually molested boys won a jury award of nearly $37 million Thursday, bringing the total payout in the case to about $69 million.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna4808590

Nice try, but the difference is that the ELCA doesn't have an organized hierarchy that used its power to cover up the crimes for decades.

I'm sorry that's hard for you to face.

Wow. And with a history going all the way back to 1987!

And if you really believe the ELCA has never tried to bury an abuse case I’m the one sorry for you.

And I’ll just leave this here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/us/abuse-by-clergy-is-not-just-a-catholic-problem.html

Not a single person has indicated that child sexual abuse exists only in the Catholic church. But by design, most Protestant denominations (including the ELCA) are not hierarchical. They're independent congregations. So, you're still wrong.

No, I’m still right because (1) the entire premise that the Roman Church is evil incarnate and bereft of authority because of sexual abuse is replete in the prior posts, both implicitly and explicitly; (2) the decentralized nature of many Protestant denominations makes them far less inviting targets than the gigantic, centralized in some ways, perceived to be wealthy Roman Church; and (3) your apparent point that decentralized denominations are better than the Roman Church because however corrupt any individual minister or branch might be, there is no central administration to be corrupted, is simply ridiculous.

You are being willfully obtuse. There can't be a worldwide coverup if there's no hierarchy to carry it out. Martin Luther got rid of that for a reason.

But clearly, all those abuse claims were just made up to get money from wealthy, holy Mother Church anyway. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP if you’re still listening, I was in your position. The more liberal branch of Lutheranism (ELCA) worked for me. It felt like church (a lot of the same liturgy as Catholic) without the pedophilia, sexism, and social conservatism.

Nope, no sex abuse in the Lutherans.

“ Thore was pastor of St. Nicodemus for about 20 years in 2004, when he admitted to church officials that he had had inappropriate sexual contact with two boys in his congregation years earlier.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/buffalonews.com/news/local/lutheran-pastor-accused-of-abuse-says-he-lived-in-torment-over-any-wrong-he-committed/article_322b5b4a-3aad-5b37-be6b-e5f45937550f.amp.html

“Victims of a former Lutheran minister who sexually molested boys won a jury award of nearly $37 million Thursday, bringing the total payout in the case to about $69 million.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna4808590

Nice try, but the difference is that the ELCA doesn't have an organized hierarchy that used its power to cover up the crimes for decades.

I'm sorry that's hard for you to face.

Wow. And with a history going all the way back to 1987!

And if you really believe the ELCA has never tried to bury an abuse case I’m the one sorry for you.

And I’ll just leave this here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/us/abuse-by-clergy-is-not-just-a-catholic-problem.html

Not a single person has indicated that child sexual abuse exists only in the Catholic church. But by design, most Protestant denominations (including the ELCA) are not hierarchical. They're independent congregations. So, you're still wrong.

No, I’m still right because (1) the entire premise that the Roman Church is evil incarnate and bereft of authority because of sexual abuse is replete in the prior posts, both implicitly and explicitly; (2) the decentralized nature of many Protestant denominations makes them far less inviting targets than the gigantic, centralized in some ways, perceived to be wealthy Roman Church; and (3) your apparent point that decentralized denominations are better than the Roman Church because however corrupt any individual minister or branch might be, there is no central administration to be corrupted, is simply ridiculous.

You are being willfully obtuse. There can't be a worldwide coverup if there's no hierarchy to carry it out. Martin Luther got rid of that for a reason.

But clearly, all those abuse claims were just made up to get money from wealthy, holy Mother Church anyway. /s

I agree.
It would just be many, many small, local covers. Probably most of the time, the story never really comes out.
Everything you are told in a Protestant Church comes from the mind of the one lead pastor who may or may not have attended a seminary and has no current external guidance. So, basically, you know what (s)he knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP if you’re still listening, I was in your position. The more liberal branch of Lutheranism (ELCA) worked for me. It felt like church (a lot of the same liturgy as Catholic) without the pedophilia, sexism, and social conservatism.

Nope, no sex abuse in the Lutherans.

“ Thore was pastor of St. Nicodemus for about 20 years in 2004, when he admitted to church officials that he had had inappropriate sexual contact with two boys in his congregation years earlier.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/buffalonews.com/news/local/lutheran-pastor-accused-of-abuse-says-he-lived-in-torment-over-any-wrong-he-committed/article_322b5b4a-3aad-5b37-be6b-e5f45937550f.amp.html

“Victims of a former Lutheran minister who sexually molested boys won a jury award of nearly $37 million Thursday, bringing the total payout in the case to about $69 million.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna4808590

Nice try, but the difference is that the ELCA doesn't have an organized hierarchy that used its power to cover up the crimes for decades.

I'm sorry that's hard for you to face.

Wow. And with a history going all the way back to 1987!

And if you really believe the ELCA has never tried to bury an abuse case I’m the one sorry for you.

And I’ll just leave this here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/us/abuse-by-clergy-is-not-just-a-catholic-problem.html

Not a single person has indicated that child sexual abuse exists only in the Catholic church. But by design, most Protestant denominations (including the ELCA) are not hierarchical. They're independent congregations. So, you're still wrong.

No, I’m still right because (1) the entire premise that the Roman Church is evil incarnate and bereft of authority because of sexual abuse is replete in the prior posts, both implicitly and explicitly; (2) the decentralized nature of many Protestant denominations makes them far less inviting targets than the gigantic, centralized in some ways, perceived to be wealthy Roman Church; and (3) your apparent point that decentralized denominations are better than the Roman Church because however corrupt any individual minister or branch might be, there is no central administration to be corrupted, is simply ridiculous.

You are being willfully obtuse. There can't be a worldwide coverup if there's no hierarchy to carry it out. Martin Luther got rid of that for a reason.

But clearly, all those abuse claims were just made up to get money from wealthy, holy Mother Church anyway. /s

I agree.
It would just be many, many small, local covers. Probably most of the time, the story never really comes out.
Everything you are told in a Protestant Church comes from the mind of the one lead pastor who may or may not have attended a seminary and has no current external guidance. So, basically, you know what (s)he knows.

Of course. Because God forbid it's a she!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

No. Jesus started the Catholic Church and made Saint Peter the first Pope. Christianity was brought out of Palestine and into Rome and other places by Saint Peter and Saint Paul (born Saul). Early Christians were persecuted and forced into hiding. By the time Constantine became emperor, there were many Christians, including much of the Roman army, and it was probably as much a shrewd political move on his part as much as it was Divine revelation.

However, as much as you might want to talk about the Church leaders and what was set on which day, what is most interesting here are the people who were willing to have faith and endure persecution and even torture and death. Constantine likely really only made Christianity the official religion of Rome because so many people were following it already. The Catholic Church is, and has always been, formed by the masses of people who believe.

Yes, indeed -- the Catechism version!

I guess. This is the National Geographic, the DK science, the History Channel, and the existing primary source version as well.

I am not sure where the "Constantine made up Christianity to fit with pagan beliefs" version comes from.

I'm a Syrian Christian- we got the 1st church, I believe from St. Paul. We are the first gentle Christians. It was not Catholic, no pope. We eventually merged into Greek orthodox, then later broke away. Roman Catholicism did not begin until Emperor Constantine. And I believe he named himself the 1st pope.

People living in the Roman province of syria were some very early Christians but were either part of the Roman Empire or Parthian/Sassanian Empire as Syria was a region not a country. The first nation to officially adopt Christianity was the Kingdom of Armenia. Some Syrian Christians do recognize the Pope, others fall into the Greek camp, and still others fall into the non-Chalcedon camp and their many groups all recognize a patriarch. Antioch, one of the five ancient patriarchies, currently has five claimants to the See, none of whom actually reside in Antioch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

No. Jesus started the Catholic Church and made Saint Peter the first Pope. Christianity was brought out of Palestine and into Rome and other places by Saint Peter and Saint Paul (born Saul). Early Christians were persecuted and forced into hiding. By the time Constantine became emperor, there were many Christians, including much of the Roman army, and it was probably as much a shrewd political move on his part as much as it was Divine revelation.

However, as much as you might want to talk about the Church leaders and what was set on which day, what is most interesting here are the people who were willing to have faith and endure persecution and even torture and death. Constantine likely really only made Christianity the official religion of Rome because so many people were following it already. The Catholic Church is, and has always been, formed by the masses of people who believe.

Yes, indeed -- the Catechism version!

I guess. This is the National Geographic, the DK science, the History Channel, and the existing primary source version as well.

I am not sure where the "Constantine made up Christianity to fit with pagan beliefs" version comes from.

really? -- maybe I'll believe that after reviewing all these sources when you post verification here on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The unique example of a “corrupt organization,” yes? No other organization with any issues? No other corruption? No public entities with problems? Nope. Just the Catholics.

I think this is akin to systemic vs. individual racism.

The RCC has a systemic child abuse problem. Not an individual problem, a systemic one. At the highest levels of the Church, there was an organized and systemic effort to cover up abuse, to move abusive priests from parish to parish, and to sideline and discredit child sexual abuse victims. It's baked into the crust.

Yes, other organizations have seen abuse occur but none have gone so far to side with abusers as the RCC.

You haven’t got the slightest idea what you’re talking about. History is replete with examples of organizations, particularly public schools and other public entities with access to children, doing everything they could to keep their abuse problems quiet, and when that failed, hiding behind immunity to avoid making things right. Just recently, a major Protestant denomination (sorry, forget which) got caught red handed in a cover up of precisely the sort you assert was uniquely the province of the Catholic Church. The Church may have had its problems, and those might have been mismanaged (sometimes in relative good faith), but it is undeniable that the Church became and remains a primary target because of size, perceived wealth, archived records, and relative unwillingness to defend. Allegations against the Church also get more attention because of opposition to Church teaching on various issues and a desire to use such (typically unproven and in many cases highly questionable) allegations to undermine the Church’s moral authority.

This is the "everybody does it" defense -- so unattractive in a major world religion.

[Anonymous]

Also the rule that priests don’t marry was created to protect assets from his wife not because “god” wanted celibate priests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also the rule that priests don’t marry was created to protect assets from his wife not because “god” wanted celibate priests.

It had more to do with making sure bishops didn’t try to pass down titles to their sons, but yes every properly catechised Catholic is aware of the difference between a discipline and a doctrine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

No. Jesus started the Catholic Church and made Saint Peter the first Pope. Christianity was brought out of Palestine and into Rome and other places by Saint Peter and Saint Paul (born Saul). Early Christians were persecuted and forced into hiding. By the time Constantine became emperor, there were many Christians, including much of the Roman army, and it was probably as much a shrewd political move on his part as much as it was Divine revelation.

However, as much as you might want to talk about the Church leaders and what was set on which day, what is most interesting here are the people who were willing to have faith and endure persecution and even torture and death. Constantine likely really only made Christianity the official religion of Rome because so many people were following it already. The Catholic Church is, and has always been, formed by the masses of people who believe.

Yes, indeed -- the Catechism version!

I guess. This is the National Geographic, the DK science, the History Channel, and the existing primary source version as well.

I am not sure where the "Constantine made up Christianity to fit with pagan beliefs" version comes from.

really? -- maybe I'll believe that after reviewing all these sources when you post verification here on DCUM.

What kind of verification? I’m not an expert. This is textbook level information. Do you want a link to a good World History textbook? These are the ones I have at my house.

https://www.amazon.com/History-World-Map-DK/dp/1465475850/ref=mp_s_a_1_14?adgrpid=58775005591&dchild=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7q-jhNzw8gIVGInICh3SkQGzEAAYASAAEgLX1vD_BwE&hvadid=274704059015&hvdev=m&hvlocphy=9024584&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=6211520679620366988&hvtargid=kwd-298678243838&hydadcr=29260_10734809&keywords=dk+world+atlas&qid=1631150213&sr=8-14

https://www.amazon.com/National-Geographic-Almanac-World-History/dp/1426213913/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=national+geographic+world+history+textbook&qid=1631150299&sr=8-3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who feel they disagree with Church teachings sometimes do not fully understand those teachings or the basis for them. They may see only the “headlines” but might never have been exposed to the “body” of the story. Catholic teaching is the product of millennia of divine revelation, lived experience and philosophical and theological reflection by some of the greatest minds in human history. It has been and is often mis-taught, misrepresented and distorted, both in the Church and especially in the media.

OP, I would urge you to make your return with an open mind and heart. Make an appointment with the priest and raise your concerns, one at a time. Do the reading the priest suggests. If he can’t help you, ask for a referral to someone more knowledgeable and/or do the research on your own. If you’d like, you could begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a book) and branch out from there. The Catechism is dense but sets forth a great deal of background for the Church teachings, typically with reference to source documents including Scripture.

Above all, pray for light and understanding. Avoid being distracted by things that do not directly concern you in your specific circumstances. It sometimes is interesting and stimulating to discuss and debate “issues,” but the goal of Faith is a living relationship with God in your life, in your circumstances, so that divine love can fill you and flow out of you to others. Faith is far more a matter of the heart than of intellect, but a well trained intellect can help guide the heart.

I wish you the best.

Sounds like you've really twisted yourself up into a pretzel trying to justify your continued involvement in the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry your interior life is so twisted that you cannot see beyond human appetites into the eternal to recognize the Church that, with all its flaws, remains the one founded by God himself.

Um, didn't Roman Emperor Constantine start the Roman Catholic Church? and combine it with some Roman pagan things, like Dec 25th Yule day of baby worship became Christmas, switching day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and so forth?

No. Jesus started the Catholic Church and made Saint Peter the first Pope. Christianity was brought out of Palestine and into Rome and other places by Saint Peter and Saint Paul (born Saul). Early Christians were persecuted and forced into hiding. By the time Constantine became emperor, there were many Christians, including much of the Roman army, and it was probably as much a shrewd political move on his part as much as it was Divine revelation.

However, as much as you might want to talk about the Church leaders and what was set on which day, what is most interesting here are the people who were willing to have faith and endure persecution and even torture and death. Constantine likely really only made Christianity the official religion of Rome because so many people were following it already. The Catholic Church is, and has always been, formed by the masses of people who believe.

Yes, indeed -- the Catechism version!

I guess. This is the National Geographic, the DK science, the History Channel, and the existing primary source version as well.

I am not sure where the "Constantine made up Christianity to fit with pagan beliefs" version comes from.

really? -- maybe I'll believe that after reviewing all these sources when you post verification here on DCUM.

What kind of verification? I’m not an expert. This is textbook level information. Do you want a link to a good World History textbook? These are the ones I have at my house.

https://www.amazon.com/History-World-Map-DK/dp/1465475850/ref=mp_s_a_1_14?adgrpid=58775005591&dchild=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7q-jhNzw8gIVGInICh3SkQGzEAAYASAAEgLX1vD_BwE&hvadid=274704059015&hvdev=m&hvlocphy=9024584&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=6211520679620366988&hvtargid=kwd-298678243838&hydadcr=29260_10734809&keywords=dk+world+atlas&qid=1631150213&sr=8-14

https://www.amazon.com/National-Geographic-Almanac-World-History/dp/1426213913/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=national+geographic+world+history+textbook&qid=1631150299&sr=8-3

You're not an expert? You certainly come across as one -- until references are requested for your statements.

You want to be Catholic - fine. Leave others out of it. The lies and the guilt trip may work with children, but not with adults.