Birth control.

[Brooklyn Knight]

I am okay with my reasons seeming artificial to you.

I don't know. God only being slightly better because there's no torment with Him?

 

[Tallguy88]

Bene, some people want flowers and bubblegum in the faith life, others want the hard truth. Don't feel bad, you're being honest. Some Catholics remind me of Mormons when they witness to outsiders, giving them all of the "God loves you so much!!!!" stuff up front and keeping quiet on the strange stuff until the fish is hooked and in the boat.

Who on this thread watered down anything?

 

[MikeK]

Who on this thread watered down anything?

Michie and anyone else who suggested that we need to keep meat from fragile outsiders, lest the learn the truth and run away.

 

[Tallguy88]

Michie and anyone else who suggested that we need to keep meat from fragile outsiders, lest the learn the truth and run away.

I didn't say that. I don't think she said that either.

I more or less agreed with what Iranaeus said. Namely that what is beneficial, from the saints, for one person won't necessarily be beneficial for someone else.

As far as "meat" goes, as a convert myself, I can certainly see why you wouldn't present some of the more "extreme" visions to a seeker. I think this is just something cradles can have a difficult time relating to.

 

[MikeK]

Michie did say that, but more on point, why would we want to lure people into a system knowing that once they're in and see the way things really are, they risk eternal torment if they leave? Why not let them first observe the darkest bits and know what they're signing up for?

 

[Tallguy88]

Michie did say that, but more on point, why would we want to lure people into a system knowing that once they're in and see the way things really are, they risk eternal torment if they leave? Why not let them first observe the darkest bits and know what they're signing up for?

Because those things aren't Church doctrine and aren't required belief for Catholics. As far as I'm aware, Lourdes and Fatima are the closest thing to universally accepted private revelations. But some of that way out there stuff is best left to those who truly find spiritual sustenance in them. What does it matter to my salvation whether 99% of all people go to hell? That's more likely to discourage me from even trying than anything. Or what about whether Mary experience labor pains? Not terribly relevant to anything. But if those sorts of things are your thing, then you need at at least have some level of understanding of theology before addressing them. That's why RCIA classes tend to focus on the "main points" of Cathokicism. Because those are what people need to know about the faith in order to make an informed decision about whether they should join or not.

 

[MikeK]

Because those things aren't Church doctrine and aren't required belief for Catholics. As far as I'm aware, Lourdes and Fatima are the closest thing to universally accepted private revelations. But some of that way out there stuff is best left to those who truly find spiritual sustenance in them. What does it matter to my salvation whether 99% of all people go to hell? That's more likely to discourage me from even trying than anything. Or what about whether Mary experience labor pains? Not terribly relevant to anything. But if those sorts of things are your thing, then you need at at least have some level of understanding of theology before addressing them. That's why RCIA classes tend to focus on the "main points" of Cathokicism. Because those are what people need to know about the faith in order to make an informed decision about whether they should join or not.

I think Saints' statements re the number of Catholics who will be any to hell is an important topic to consider for the person considering the Church. While I understand that their discouraging statements are not infallible, the Church isn't exactly actively promoting them as errant. The person considering giving up a life spent doing as they please, pursuing their own whims without a care might want to know what lies beyond, after they've given their life to God, but maybe not thoroughly enough.

 

[Michie]

I didn't say that. I don't think she said that either.

I more or less agreed with what Iranaeus said. Namely that what is beneficial, from the saints, for one person won't necessarily be beneficial for someone else.

As far as "meat" goes, as a convert myself, I can certainly see why you wouldn't present some of the more "extreme" visions to a seeker. I think this is just something cradles can have a difficult time relating to.

The meat milk analogy was spoken from my own experience as a convert & is Scriptural.

1Corinthians 3:1-9

Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings?

What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. The one who plants and the one who waters have one purpose, and they will each be rewarded according to their own labor. For we are co-workers in God’s service; you are God’s field, God’s building.

Hebrews 5:11-14

We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

 

[Michie]

Because those things aren't Church doctrine and aren't required belief for Catholics. As far as I'm aware, Lourdes and Fatima are the closest thing to universally accepted private revelations. But some of that way out there stuff is best left to those who truly find spiritual sustenance in them. What does it matter to my salvation whether 99% of all people go to hell? That's more likely to discourage me from even trying than anything. Or what about whether Mary experience labor pains? Not terribly relevant to anything. But if those sorts of things are your thing, then you need at at least have some level of understanding of theology before addressing them. That's why RCIA classes tend to focus on the "main points" of Cathokicism. Because those are what people need to know about the faith in order to make an informed decision about whether they should join or not.

Exactly & the thread was about one of those main points until all heck broke loose.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

All heck sure has been uh-breakin' loose lately a lot around here lately, eh Michie!? yeesh!

Exactly & the thread was about one of those main points until all heck broke loose.

 

[Michie]

All heck sure has been uh-breakin' loose lately a lot around here lately, eh Michie!? yeesh!

Indeed & for no reason that I can see.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Michie is right - the saints' revelations don't have to be accepted as completely and readily applicable to everyone's life.. The Church makes no such mandate, so it is completely acceptable to view them as edifying for those saints without being compelled to delve into them yourself.

I like theology, so I like reading the Fathers and their homilies and treatises and such. However, when it comes to visions and messages and serious mysticism, that is too much for me, so I do not delve into it (and never did even when I was very devout). There is enough edification and beauty for me in the scriptures and the Fathers and papal encyclicals and the catechism. I never felt a need for much else.

There is nothing wrong or sinful with that. Not everyone is equipped to wade through St. Catherine of Siena's Dialogues or St. John of the Cross' The Dark Night of the Soul. Not everyone will find comfort in them, or even be able to make sense of them. The writings and works of the saints are addendums to the faith, things that can enrich and clarify it, but not things that are compulsory for being Christian.

Can the writings/works of the saints be beneficial and helpful? Sure.
Do we have to include those things in our spiritual lives? No.

Reading St. Augustine's Confessions has given me more comfort than any stuff about secrets of Fatima ever could. That is not wrong.

 

[Michie]

Michie is right - the saints' revelations don't have to be accepted as completely and readily applicable to everyone's life.. The Church makes no such mandate, so it is completely acceptable to view them as edifying for those saints without being compelled to delve into them yourself.

I like theology, so I like reading the Fathers and their homilies and treatises and such. However, when it comes to visions and messages and serious mysticism, that is too much for me, so I do not delve into it (and never did even when I was very devout). There is enough edification and beauty for me in the scriptures and the Fathers and papal encyclicals and the catechism. I never felt a need for much else.

There is nothing wrong or sinful with that. Not everyone is equipped to wade through St. Catherine of Siena's Dialogues or St. John of the Cross' The Dark Night of the Soul. Not everyone will find comfort in them, or even be able to make sense of them. The writings and works of the saints are addendums to the faith, things that can enrich and clarify it, but not things that are compulsory for being Christian.

Can the writings/works of the saints be beneficial and helpful? Sure.
Do we have to include those things in our spiritual lives? No.

Reading St. Augustine's Confessions has given me more comfort than any stuff about secrets of Fatima ever could. That is not wrong.

Thank you Gwen. Sometimes I feel like there are those trying to Gaslight me! LOL. *Not sure if you are familiar with that movie*.

 

[Tallguy88]

Michie is right - the saints' revelations don't have to be accepted as completely and readily applicable to everyone's life.. The Church makes no such mandate, so it is completely acceptable to view them as edifying for those saints without being compelled to delve into them yourself.

I like theology, so I like reading the Fathers and their homilies and treatises and such. However, when it comes to visions and messages and serious mysticism, that is too much for me, so I do not delve into it (and never did even when I was very devout). There is enough edification and beauty for me in the scriptures and the Fathers and papal encyclicals and the catechism. I never felt a need for much else.

There is nothing wrong or sinful with that. Not everyone is equipped to wade through St. Catherine of Siena's Dialogues or St. John of the Cross' The Dark Night of the Soul. Not everyone will find comfort in them, or even be able to make sense of them. The writings and works of the saints are addendums to the faith, things that can enrich and clarify it, but not things that are compulsory for being Christian.

Can the writings/works of the saints be beneficial and helpful? Sure.
Do we have to include those things in our spiritual lives? No.

Reading St. Augustine's Confessions has given me more comfort than any stuff about secrets of Fatima ever could. That is not wrong.

That's basically what I've been saying all along. You just said it better.

 

[Hoankan]

Mod Hat On

Thread has become a serious mess. Closing permenantly.

Also please remember OBOB's Statement of Faith when posting​