zarove,in your posts i read that you agree on very much things with the catholics and that you don't really seem to be a protestant as you claim

could you please tell me then why you aren't catholic and what kind of protestant you are?

-- jerryyyyyyyy(sdqa's friend,robert's friend,tom's brother,orthodox christian,hetereosexual) (doofykorn@hotmail.com), January 05, 2005

Answers

Yechniclaly Im not Protestant. Im chruch of christ, which is restorationist, and which rejects Protestant theology by and large.

However, it is not Cahtolic or Ortodox either.

It owes its current existance to thr cambelite movement, which taugh a return to firts century chfistainity and rejected the works of Luther and Calvin. It did not, hwoever, accept he Catholci teachigns on all things, and instead teaches independant congregaitonalism.

all that said, I disagree with many thigns that the chruch of chist typiclaly teaches.

Noentheless, I am more chruch of chirst than I am protestant.However, I currently atend a 4 Square gospel church. I do nto rrlaly aprtcipate as a member though, and am merley a visitor who participates in worhsi dservices, and no the theology spacific of the denominaton.

As for Catholci doctirnes ad practices, there are sme tigns I tend to disagree with within the sturcture.

These thigns show up less freqendly here, because this si not a forum to challenge Cahtolic beleifs, except perhas as intellegent excersise, or quandry.

semtimes I merley clarify the Cahtolci positiona s I undetsand it.

But at times I have disagreed. ( such as, when the grl received a rice cmmunion Host. I saw no harm, others did.)

Nonthels, the bulk of my disagreeances pale in compasicson to what I agree on, andhtis si what all chrisaisn shodul focus on, sicne most agree on the geenral morals and practices.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 05, 2005.

Zarove,

I've said it before; you know more about Catholicism than most Catholics. I don't think you'ld be alone in having difficulties with some teachings. I know we're not supposed to (have difficulties or disagreements) but really, its not unusual.

THere are some who have it all together. I do the best I can but feel like a shadow of a Catholic after reading some of your posts.

PLease don't feel guilty, my shadow is of my own casting---not your fault.

Happy New Year!

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), January 05, 2005.

Hi Jerry!

In another thread you asked, "what is Vatican II"? No one answered you, I think.

Vatican Council II was a gathering of all the Catholic bishops of the world (over 2000 of them) at the vatican in Rome, from 1962 to 1965. They gathered as the leaders of the church, and were called together by the man who was then pope, John XXIII.

Those bishops decided to try to relate more to the modern world, and as a result of those meetings, there were various changes in the Catholic religion, such as, worship services (Mass) are now in the language of the people (e.g., English) instead of Latin. Also various rules of the Church were relaxed, e.g., not eating meat on Fridays was changed. Relationships with other faiths were improved: Catholics and protestants now work together on Bible translations and in deeds of love and mercy, and pray for each other affectionately, whereas it used to be more an adversarial relationship.

Some Catholics blame Vatican II for various negative tendencies since 1965, like decreased attendance at Mass by Catholics, more divorces, priest sex scandals, lack of respect for the pope, etc. But in my humble opinion, the seeds of those problems were to be found even before Vatican II.

(For longtime Catholics, I know I'm being brief and maybe simplistic on points, but it should give Jerry some idea of what Vatican II was.)

Be blessed, Jerry. (I now admit you actually exist!) ;-)

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 05, 2005.

Zarove is one of the most intellectually honest posters I've seen. Whatever the religion under discussion, he takes the time to learn what that religion teaches and is careful not to misrepresent the teachings in order to "win" an argument. He may sound Catholic at times, but only because he is explaining the actual teachings of the Church rather than trying to misrepresent them in order to prove the Catholic Church wrong.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), January 06, 2005.

Zarove is one of the most curtious and respectful non-Catholic i've seen here. He has even taught me a thing or two about my own beliefs. I also have an abundant amount of respect for the guy and would gladly tip my hat to him anyday anytime.

-- Des (newfiedufie@msn.com), January 06, 2005.

I wasn't even aware Zarove isn't a practising Catholic. Maybe because his writing closes the doors more often than it communicates. (I know; he's a dislexic.)

No disrespect intended to Zarove; but the mention of Church of Christ brought back memories. I worked alongside an African American buddy in the late 50's; he was from jackson, Miss. Hard-working, fairly bright and seeming not very religious. He told me he was sending two young daughters to a Catholic elementary school. He & his wife thought highly of the Catholic schools. Yet, she wasn't a Catholic any more than he was.

I asked about that, and he explained.

''She's in the Church of Christ- - Holy Rollers, I calls them.'' Ever since, I had the impression that's all Church of Christ is. Are you a Holly Roller, Zarove?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

Andy S, and Des, I will second that.

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com"), January 06, 2005.

Churhc of christ is a restoritionist Chruch that teaches only what can be foudn in the Bible, and rejects standard reform theology.

It's not "Hply rollers". Indeed, often the mood on a cruch of christ is rather stagnant.

what I did like about the Church of Christ is its weekly communion ( which I did not know was not the practie of all chruches till I went elsewhere) and the nessesity of baptism.

I also appriciate the idea, if not ther execution, of the plain reading of the text wihtout the bells and whistles. No traditions of men. But alas, even they import soem traditions.

Chuhc of Christ typically rejects such doctorines as the raptue, Sola Fiede, and beleif in Once saved always Saved.

Its beelifs, in many ays, mirror Catholic Veiws. ( One of the reasons I fit ine asily with Catholcis and not so well with Protestants.)

However, they also see Instrumental music in worhsip as a sin, soemtign I disagree on. Though I do prefer worship without mecanical instruments, but my personal preference is NOT a doctorine.I see nohting theolgiclaly wrogn with a piaono, organ, or other type of instrument in Worship. I just prefer without. ( Call it personal taste.)

Chruch of christ touis rather simlitic , and not what anyone can class as a "Holy roller" Chruch. I classed it as Fundamentalist, until recently, since, althroyg it IS Fundamentalist in the true menaign fo the word, it lacks the earmarks of wht th term has in these later days coem to mean.

I no longer attnend churhc of christ services, since such is impossible for me at this time. I now attend a 4 Square gospel Chruch. This was such a radical shift in theology that I now know and appriciate why the Chruch of christ is not classed as Protestant. ( Been a visator in a baptist service, and a Meathodist and Calvinist one as well... and a few others over the coruse of the last two years... they seem similar if nto identical.)

I still cosidr myself chruch of Chirst as, even thugh I disagree with sme of the theology taght commonly in Chruhc of chirst, I hold fast to its ways mroe so than I embrace Proestantism. ( Faith alone, once saved alway save, baptism a unnessisary, ect...)

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

In additio tot he above, do I come off as a Holy Roller?

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

Hard to say, now. You seemed a practising Catholic to me before. In telling us what you call faith, you've made it less Catholic and more free-lance. When God calls you, do you suppose it will be to a free-lance life everlasting? A non-Catholic heaven?

Saint Paul asked them, you see; ''Has Jesus Christ been divided?'' There is no free-lance Christian Church.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

Heaven is not Catholic or Non-Catholic, nor a, I freeelance.

Heaven is Heaven, the aode of God, to which all faithful will attend by his Grace.

I make no presumption as to who is an is not there, even to myself.

My beelifs are based on sincerity and seeking the truth os a matter, whci is usually not what most initially arrive at usign base conlcusions and common sence.

To use an analogy, as a Teenager and child, many dotn see why they CANT party, drink, and have sex. what the Harm? its as they age they see the consequences, and why they shoul abstain form suhc actions.

Many in the Protestant Mainstream world to-day seem as the Teenagers. The Once saved notion is a basic understanding of scirptures, but they seem nto to think it throuh completely.

As a natural consequence, Catholic Theology, which is mroe layered and harder to undeand, coems off to them as harsh and cruel and unbiblical, when inded it is in ,any instances the most logical, and wel thyh out.

This is alo why I lean more toward Catholic theology than protestant. but I do find soem disagreement with some Chruhc teachigns and practices which have not overocme n my mind to any satisfying conclusion.

so I cannot be Catholic so long as I disagree witht hese aiad issues, which for now I retain to myself.

But I can approcoate and udnerstand such, ven thse tigns of whohc I disagree.

As I said, I seek only truth and to follow God. This is where I am lead.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

Dear Zarove:
Pardon me for being intrusive. But you say, ''So I cannot be Catholic so long as I disagree with these aiad ( ? ? ? ) --issues, which for now I retain to myself.''

One of these is divorce, is it not?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

No. I dont relaly support divorce.

Nor contraceptives, if thats queasion number two...

But why did you presme divorce?

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

It was only a guess. I'm glad you don't believe in divorce.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

More of less I hav a few Practical objectiosn to spacific theological standpoints. As I said I am not gettign into them in deapth, but I do have my disagreeances.

but overall its not to be foudn i the Moral teachings.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

If I were you, I would get to the point. We're here to discuss theology and people's objections.

You might even appreciate some counseling.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 06, 2005.

I doubt it. The issues have been discused and I lik the silence, as it leaves me freer.A wise man holds his tounge, but a fool reveals all.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

Well said Zarove, I tend to agree about not always revealing everything.

I was wondering as you listed some of the Churches you attended over the years, have you ever attended a Catholic Mass?

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), January 06, 2005.

Once. Was a bit difficult to breath as I sat in the front, and the boy swinging the incnese managed to thrust it my direciton more often than not...

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

Besides,

Any real points made by a non-Catholic just gets deleted anyway. So why bother? That little fact alone would keep me from ever desiring to be part of such an institution. If you can't handle the objections without deleting them, then you are not sure-footed.

-- (anon@anon.com), January 06, 2005.

Anon

Check out the threads, there is plenty of dissent and arguments among Canolic and non Catholic alike. Only bashing for the sake of bashing---stuff that gets us nowhere gets deleted.

Look at the "burning heretic's" thread, its gone on for quite some time and nothing's been deleted. Some people bash using pasted scripure after scripture or long tracts from anti-Catholic authors which is nothing more than a waste of space and reading time for a Catholic board. Most of those posters do not even reply to the Catholic position.

This is coming from a Catholic who has never been much of an apologist, but I can recognize an unfair point

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), January 06, 2005.

Well I know that some of my posts were deleted from another thread, and they were not bashing anything. I was objecting to false doctrine and someone got hot and bothered by it. They obviously couldn't respond with anything convincing and didn't want anyone here to witness the truth.

-- (anon@anon.com), January 06, 2005.

Currently I think all the psts form you are deleted... because they delete the IP...

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 06, 2005.

anon, certain things get deleted because they are done out of place. for example, in a thread about the tsunami where eugene called on blessed mother teresa to pray for the dead souls, another forumite decried prayer to saints which was only a bait to derail the thread topic in an attempt to attack the catholic church... something which is not what this forum is designed for.

you see, most protestants who come here have this entitlement mentality, that they should be allowed to say what they want where they want and when they want. that is not the case here. this is a CATHOLIC BOARD. for CATHOLICS to freely discuss CATHOLIC doctrine without undue harassment by protestants who dont know how to be polite and hold their tongues. so yes, if you got deleted, GOOD. try following the forum rules, behaving as the GUEST that you are here, and staying on topic while providing appropriate respect and you wont get deleted, much more so you might even earn the level of respect that upstanding members such as zarove or dave (non-catholic christian) have.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), January 06, 2005.

"I was objecting to false doctrine and someone got hot and bothered by it. They obviously couldn't respond with anything convincing and didn't want anyone here to witness the truth."

A: If you were objecting to false doctrine your comments would have been most welcome. If you were attacking Catholic doctrine you were not objecting to false doctrine.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 07, 2005.

Anon, were you a Catholic not only one year ago who also wrote a beautiful poem about Catholicism and posted it, or was that someone else?

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), January 08, 2005.