Why so many cultural Catholics?

[thecolorsblend]

Sounds like those priests read the book, "How NOT to Win Friends and Influence People." What a way to insure that those Christmas and Easter Catholics wouldn't be back until the following holiday--if then.

What did the priest say that's so terrible? He wasn't discouraging them from receiving communion; only saying that if they haven't come in a while, they need to go to confession first. If that's "offensive" to some people, I don't know what to tell them.

On Christmas and Easter (and occasions like First Communions and weddings) I have heard priests say, "If you haven't been to church in a long time, we are so happy you are here. The choir has been practicing for months. The Altar Society ladies have been decorating the Church all week. We are happy to see you all!"

"You've missed Mass tons of times, that's great! I won't do my job in reminding you to receive communion in a state of grace; go ahead and receive it anyway, everything will be just fine!" Ugh.

I have witnessed a family member at my son's first Communion (married outside the Church) burst into tears of joy because she felt so welcomed, and felt her burdens eased.

Um, I'm sorry her conscience is so fragile?

In the short term, you might think that lectures and scoldings are protecting the Eucharist from sacrilege. But lectures and scoldings never brought people into Church...

It might well protect their souls though, which I think is the more imperative concern.

You may not know how much courage or effort it took to get those lapsed Catholics through the door to that point of grace--only to get rebuffed again by the UNevangelists.

Life is pain. They know what they're doing and they know they shouldn't be doing it. Should the priest lie about that and tell them they can receive communion no matter what they've done? How is that good for their souls???

 

[LivingWordUnity]

If I know that I'm in a state of mortal sin, I won't go up to receive Holy Communion. Judas Iscariot received Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin, and the devil entered into him at exactly that point.

"When Jesus had thus spoken, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.' The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke. One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was lying close to the breast of Jesus; so Simon Peter beckoned to him and said, 'Tell us who it is of whom he speaks.' So lying thus, close to the breast of Jesus, he said to him, 'Lord, who is it?' Jesus answered, 'It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it.' So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. Then after the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, 'What you are going to do, do quickly.' Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him. Some thought that, because Judas had the money box, Jesus was telling him, 'Buy what we need for the feast'; or, that he should give something to the poor. So, after receiving the morsel, he immediately went out; and it was night." - John 13:21-30

 

[Genersis]

I would think it's for the same reason there are(or perhaps "were") so many cultural Church of England Christians in the UK, a region normally has a dominant religion, of which many people are raised to identify as a follower of that religion in that area(assuming the family has traditionally resided in the area).

To my knowledge though, Catholicism is a little different to most protestant forms of Christianity in that being considered Catholic isn't dependant on how well one follows Catholic teaching.
At least, that the gist I got from seeing similar discussions on here.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

I would think it's for the same reason there are(or perhaps "were") so many cultural Church of England Christians in the UK, a region normally has a dominant religion, of which many people are raised to identify as a follower of that religion in that area(assuming the family has traditionally resided in the area).

To my knowledge though, Catholicism is a little different to most protestant forms of Christianity in that being considered Catholic isn't dependant on how well one follows Catholic teaching.
At least, that the gist I got from seeing similar discussions on here.

Someone can be bad at following the teachings but still believe that the teachings are true. This person would still be a Catholic. But if someone rejects the teachings of the Catholic Church they are not Catholic.

Once baptized, always baptized, but not necessarily always a Catholic. See the following:

If I'm baptized as a Catholic, does that mean I'm Catholic forever, even if I marry outside the Church?

Full Question
Once people are baptized Catholic, are they Catholic forever? What if they marry outside of the Church or join another religion? If they aren't Catholic anymore, how can they become Catholic again?

Answer
Once someone is validly baptized, Catholic or otherwise, he is baptized forever (CIC 845). One can never lose baptism or become "unbaptized," although one might lose the benefits of baptism by personal sin. But as to whether someone baptized Catholic is thereafter always Catholic, that's a slightly different question.

In most cases, the answer will be that someone baptized Catholic remains Catholic (see CIC 111, 205). But, by implication of canon 205--which requires, to be considered in full communion with the Church, a basic profession of the faith, some level of sacramental participation, and some degree of submission to ecclesiastical governance--one can imagine circumstances under which someone who was baptized Catholic might reject any or all of these elements to the point at which he could not be considered fully Catholic anymore, nothwithstanding the fact that he remained baptized.

(Read more)​

 

[Genersis]

Someone can be bad at following the teachings but still believe that the teachings are true. This person would still be a Catholic. But if someone rejects the teachings of the Catholic Church they are not Catholic.

I thought that once baptised, a person was considered Catholic until they send a letter to a priest requesting to officially leave the Church?(Think it's called an "Act of Defection"?)

 

[LivingWordUnity]

I thought that once baptised, a person was considered Catholic until they send a letter to a priest requesting to officially leave the Church?(Think it's called an "Act of Defection"?)

I added to my post something that explains what I said.

 

[Rhamiel]

To my knowledge though, Catholicism is a little different to most protestant forms of Christianity in that being considered Catholic isn't dependant on how well one follows Catholic teaching.
At least, that the gist I got from seeing similar discussions on here.

good point

Protestantism is based more on intellectual consent
a byproduct of the idea of Faith Alone

Catholicism is more like Judaism in that the focus is more on a collective culture

now there are elements of intellectual consent and collectivism in both
I am just talking about what is emphasized more

 

[mark46]

When I was a little girl in pre-Vatican II days (what many of you call "the good old days" and what I call TGI2015) we were told that if you were baptized you had received "the gift of faith" and that if you rejected "the gift of faith" and joined another Church or left Church entirely they would go to hell (ah, yes, the good old days!)

Many folks here on OBOB believe this and have argued this in many, many posts. For the Vatican, this is part of pre-Vatican II misunderstandings. For many on OBOB, this is the current teaching of the Church.

 

[mark46]

To my knowledge though, Catholicism is a little different to most protestant forms of Christianity in that being considered Catholic isn't dependant on how well one follows Catholic teaching.
At least, that the gist I got from seeing similar discussions on here.

This is supposed to be true of all Christians. There is no theology test required for admission to heaven.

 

[mark46]

Protestantism is based more on intellectual consent
a byproduct of the idea of Faith Alone

hmm

Protestants need to believe in their hearts that Jesus is their Lord and Savior. I don't see this as intellectual consent. In fact many Protestants do not believe that "consent" is required at all. Many, especially Calvinists, believe that the calling of the Holy Spirit is irresistible.

Catholics in taking our baptismal vows (which we do often in mass) must assent to many things. This seems close to the "intellectual consent" that you are talking about.

 

[benedictaoo]

Excuse me for jumping into your forum, but I was having a discussion with my (Roman Catholic) husband the other night about how so many people claim to be Catholic, but don't believe in or follow basic Catholic doctrine. It doesn't seem like that's the case with most (any?) other Christians. So why do people cling to the name of Catholic when the disagree with so many teachings? Is that even "allowed"?

No it's not allowed... but free will reigns. I have heard them referred to as, "cafeteria Catholics" because they like to pick and choose what they will assent to and what they will reject. Sadly, this is not new or a phenomenon. The Church has always had those who disagree. The Church at one time called them protestants. Way back in the day they were known as "Reformers." We'll always have them... what we gonna do? Love and pray for them.

 

[benedictaoo]

The only ones I knew that identified by their churches were usually Seventh Day Adventists and Mormons. Jehovah's Witnesses as well but they do not call themselves Church.

Because those organizations are not Christian. Not part of the body of Christ. At least we are one body in Christ with our Protestant brethren even though imperfectly so... we should celebrate that and not argue about it.

 

[benedictaoo]

Vatican II itself laments the modern domination of evil and says that times were better before.

“Unlike former days, the denial of God or of religion, or the abandonment of them, are no longer unusual and individual occurrences. For today it is not rare for such things to be presented as requirements of scientific progress or of a certain new humanism. In numerous places these views are voiced not only in the teachings of philosophers, but on every side they influence literature, the arts, the interpretation of the humanities and of history and civil laws themselves. As a consequence, many people are shaken.” - Gaudium et Spes, Vatican II (added emphasis)

Ironic coming from Vll... which is the claim to fame for many.

 

[benedictaoo]

Because who doesn't appreciate an excuse to go to bars and eat fish every Friday for several weeks in Spring?

Boy, and it isn't done anywhere like it's done here.

 

[benedictaoo]

Then let me ask you this. Why go through the sacraments when you don't believe core teachings?

I'm just very curious about this, being in my mid-30's and knowing the people who were brought up Catholic are no longer practicing - but still identify as Catholic.

because for a Catholic it's what they we're taught to do. But sadly, some Catholics never had an encounter with the Lord because they never opened the eyes of their hearts to see Him. So they go through the motions never understanding it takes faith and love to have it all come alive for them to believe. The sacraments give to us, but we must receive the gift or what's been given will bare no fruit.

 

[mark46]

No it's not allowed... but free will reigns. I have heard them referred to as, "cafeteria Catholics" because they like to pick and choose what they will assent to and what they will reject. Sadly, this is not new or a phenomenon. The Church has always had those who disagree. The Church at one time called them protestants. Way back in the day they were known as "Reformers." We'll always have them... what we gonna do? Love and pray for them.

And for 2/3 of the history of the Church, they were called Christians, before we had the "Protestant" label to use for those who did not accept every teaching of the Church.

 

[ALoveDivine]

An interesting thought. If only "good" Catholics (meaning those not in "mortal" sin and who accept every single teaching of the church without exception) went to mass and gave financially, from a purely economic standpoint, the church would be in serious trouble. I'm convinced that a massive majority of practicing Catholics do not fit the criteria of being "good" Catholics.

If only "good" Catholics went forward to communion, out of a mass of 200 people you'd likely see 3 or 4 go up. To be honest I've seen far more Godliness and holiness in nondenominational churches than I've ever seen in Catholic churches. Granted I am a Catholic, but I'm just calling it how I see it from my own experience.

 

[mark46]

An interesting thought. If only "good" Catholics (meaning those not in "mortal" sin and who accept every single teaching of the church without exception) went to mass and gave financially, from a purely economic standpoint, the church would be in serious trouble. I'm convinced that a massive majority of practicing Catholics do not fit the criteria of being "good" Catholics.

If only "good" Catholics went forward to communion, out of a mass of 200 people you'd likely see 3 or 4 go up. To be honest I've seen far more Godliness and holiness in nondenominational churches than I've ever seen in Catholic churches. Granted I am a Catholic, but I'm just calling it how I see it from my own experience.

The Church is a hospital, not a place only for the holy. As St John Chrysostom taught,

"Enter into the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed again to enter the Church, be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent."

 

[FlaviusAetius]

An interesting thought. If only "good" Catholics (meaning those not in "mortal" sin and who accept every single teaching of the church without exception) went to mass and gave financially, from a purely economic standpoint, the church would be in serious trouble. I'm convinced that a massive majority of practicing Catholics do not fit the criteria of being "good" Catholics.

If only "good" Catholics went forward to communion, out of a mass of 200 people you'd likely see 3 or 4 go up. To be honest I've seen far more Godliness and holiness in nondenominational churches than I've ever seen in Catholic churches. Granted I am a Catholic, but I'm just calling it how I see it from my own experience.

Considering non Catholics are fallen humans too, you don't think the same issues don't apply to them? Meaning the people singing hallelujah and seeming to behave pious could very well be living in sin?

 

[FlaviusAetius]

DP