The Catholic Church

by Pathofthorns 12 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Pathofthorns

  For all that we've trashed the Catholic Church as though they've been some kind of "arch-enemy" of Jehovah's Witnesses and Christianity itself, its quite facinating to see this once strict religion gradually abandoning its teachings and becoming more mainstream.

  Its quite interesting to see how centuries held beliefs can be abandoned due to changing times. I think there are many more similarities between the catholic church and Witnesses than we realized, despite our insisting how radically different we were.

  I'm not saying the attrocities committed by the catholic church are somehow equal or less than mistakes made by Jehovah's Witnesses. But i do think that the Pope's acknowledging and apologizing for many of these earlier this year is a step in the right direction.

  I guess they get new light too as they've changed their teachings on hellfire, and now they've even opened up heaven to non-Catholics. So much of our difficulties has to do with all the exclusivity we give to ourselves, that we are the only ones with the "truth".

  Time shows we make mistakes like everyone else, but failing to acknowledge and apologize for them only makes it worse in this age of holding leaders accountable for their decisions. At some point every group realizes they must change with the times.

  We only thought we'd be in this for a short time, and I think the people at the top still do, hence while great changes have been made, there is an obvious hessitation to make even greater necessary changes. There also remains a moral accountablity for past errors that remains unmet.

  Change is a part of life, and there are painful decisions that need to be made by all of us on a personal level. Recognizing you made a mistake and not clinging to the past once you realize it is very important to survival and progress. And the sooner we are honest with ourselves, the better off we will be. I think its the same with any organization or religion.

  Fantasy always meets up with reality when it comes to life, if not in life, it does in death. I think the Catholic church has made some good moves to keep itself in existance. Whether they are genuine or sincere or not, I don't know; perhaps its just about survival. But I think the next batch of leaders "in the truth" will regret the former one's not having made these changes sooner.

  It will be interesting to see where it all ends up. Apologies make the past easier to accept and to forgive, but when the people see it as forced or some sort of political move who knows how they will respond? [url] http://discussion.witnesses.net/Forum34/HTML/003122.html[/url]

  Path
• 

  Frenchy

  Amen, brother.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  waiting

  Hey Path,

  I guess they get new light too as they've changed their teachings on hellfire, and now they've even opened up heaven to non-Catholics. So much of our difficulties has to do with all the exclusivity we give to ourselves, that we are the only ones with the "truth".

  Where are these changes on hell & heaven discussed? Being a baptised (wrote letter of resignation, however) Catholic, I'm interested in reading about these changes. The fear of hellfire was a large part of my life growing up

  Another website wrote about totalitarian-style religions, and the part fear plays in their teachings. Along with that, if this is what a person knows - and is suited (for one reason or another) for that style of religion, if they leave (Catholicism), they usually end up in another totaliarian religion (Jehovah's Witnesses).

  I, along with Catholics who studied from the Truth Book, would be living proof of that theory. We were a great influx into the org. in the mid/late 60's.

  Btw, back then, a lot of hippies looked into the WTBTS. It was considered a rebellion-type religion - freeing the hords from rules & regulations of established churches.

  How times have changed. The WTBTS became what they rebelled against - another living proof of governments/religions/business evolving theory.

  waiting
• 

  Frenchy

  I was very young when Mom began studying with the pioneer sister that called on her. I grew up in what I was convinced with the TRUTH. Years down the road I began to have some very uneasy feelings. It would be longer still before I would dare to face those feelings and call them doubt. When I sat at the meetings there were two people in my chair. One that reveled in the thought of a perfect world filled with perfect people living out their perfect dream, a world that was just around the corner. It was so close, we were being told, that we could almost reach out and touch it. But right beside me sat another person who was not so happy. This man had a worried look that lurked behind the smile that he wore. He saw the hollowness of many ‘explanations’ and it worried him that something so important would hinge on something so flimsy.
  There came a time when he could no longer deny the real truth. There came a time when he could no longer pretend that disturbing discrepancies existed. The ‘truth’ has to be just that. Opinions and viewpoints and interpretations and speculations can and do change but the ‘truth’ does not. Conclusion? These things were being called ‘truth’. ‘Truth’ is far too precious a thing to be counterfeited.
  And so I asked myself the question that had been put to me many times before. “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life…” And although the question had been put to me with another purpose in mind I finally understood the question and the answer at once. It was Christ that had the sayings of everlasting life. There was no one else. Peter had both asked and answered his own question. There was and is no other that has the sayings of everlasting life, no man, no organization.
  So what is the ‘true’ religion? It’s not a ‘system of beliefs’ perpetrated upon a group (small or large) of people over whom a class of men exercise their authority. “Moreover, do not call anyone YOUR father (or mother) on earth, for one is YOUR Father (or mother), the heavenly One. Neither be called ‘leaders,’ (nor assume the role of one, with or without a title) for YOUR Leader is one, the Christ. But the greatest one among YOU must be YOUR minister” (Matt 23:9-11)—NWT. So the ‘true’ religion is the set of beliefs taught by Christ that one comes to accept in his life. It is the reverence that he gives to God and the compassion with which he treats his fellow man. This religion will not contain all ‘truth’. Nothing human does. It is not a requirement.
  What is the true Church? It is the platform or forum which exists that, rather than dictating to its attenders what the will of God is, allows those who attend the opportunity to express before others their faith and convictions. It is the place where people come to encourage and learn from one another. It is the place where the love of which we have become convinced can be demonstrated. For it was Christ himself who said: “For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.” (Matt 18:20)—NWT He did not say “here is where I am and here is where you must come to be with me.” He said that he would be where (wherever) two or three would gather in his name. He will come to us when we gather in his name. Here is where the true Church exists.
  This is what I have come to believe for this is the only thing that makes sense to me. When I pray to God I don’t pray that I am right in what I believe but rather I pray that He will show me what is right. Is He telling me then that I am right in that He has not revealed anything different to me? I don’t know. How can I know? And the realization of this tells me that no other man or group of men know either. That being the case I will follow my heart. I believe that is where the kingdom of God is, in the heart. In his explanation of the parable of the sower, Jesus said: “Where anyone hears the word of the kingdom but does not get the sense of it, the wicked one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart; this is the one sown alongside the road.” Matt 13:19—NWT

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  Seven

  Path,

  I think the Catholic church has made some good moves to keep itself in existance.

  But then again with 1,013,000,000(1998 figures)members worldwide or 1/6 of the world's population, the loss of a few million members is insignificant. It remains to be seen if we could survive after taking such a hit. It appears to me that as
  other denominations move toward the left becoming more liberal a decrease in membership follows. If we were to see some long overdue major reform, I wonder how many of us who have left would reconsider and return?
• 

  Frenchy

  I’ve had some discussions with Catholics on the subject of Hell. There are many that contend that the Church never taught that Hell was a place with a literal, burning fire but rather that the torment generated by Hell was the very fact of their alienation from God. Many contend that this is and always was the stance of the Church and that overzealous priests and others pushed this to the point of ‘inventing’ the firey Hell concept. They point to art that depicts such a thing and they say that this was never intended to be a literal depiction but rather is was metaphorical. (Sort of like the 1975 business eh?)
  HOWEVER: This is what their encyclopedia says:
  “The poena sensus, or pain of sense, consists in the torment of fire so frequently mentioned in the Holy Bible. According to the greater number of theologians the term fire denotes a material fire, and so a real fire. We hold to this teaching as absolutely true and correct. However, we must not forget two things: from Catharinus (d. 1553) to our times there have never been wanting theologians who interpret the Scriptural term fire metaphorically, as denoting an incorporeal fire; and secondly, thus far the Church has not censured their opinion. Some few of the Fathers also thought of a metaphorical explanation. Nevertheless, Scripture and tradition speak again and again of the fire of hell, and there is no sufficient reason for taking the term as a mere metaphor. It is urged: How can a material fire torment demons, or human souls before the resurrection of the body? But, if our soul is so joined to the body as to be keenly sensitive to the pain of fire, why should the omnipotent God be unable to bind even pure spirits to some material substance in such a manner that they suffer a torment more or less similar to the pain of fire which the soul can feel on earth? The reply indicates, as far as possible, how we may form an idea of the pain of fire which the demons suffer. Theologians have elaborated various theories on this subject, which, however, we do not wish to detail here” –emphasis mine.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  Frenchy

  Seven makes a valid point. This does seem to be the case quite often. However, to be unyielding once presented with incontrovertible evidence that you are wrong is also a means of losing a lot of members. So what does one do? Ah, ‘what tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.’
  The trick is to change policy without losing credibility and identity. This is not an exact science as we are all aware. Even the most accomplished statesmen and politicians sometimes zig when they should zag with disastrous consequences. Both the Catholic Church and the Society have thus far been very successful at doing this two-step. They at once retain their credibility as being the undisputed last word on the will of God while at the same time evoking sympathy from the flock with their claims of human fallibility.
  We must remember that in there is one goal in mind with both organizations. The retention and, if possible, the increase of the flock. Whatever must be done shall indeed be done to achieve that end BECAUSE……..without the flock there is no Religion or Church! No principle or ‘divine truth’ is so great and important that it can be adhered to at the expense of losing the flock. And here we see one of the great flaws of religion as an organization. It’s first and primary function is to exist. For this it must be prepared to sacrifice whatever is necessary. Against this ANYTHING may be justified and recorded history tells us that this has indeed been the case.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  waiting

  Hey Frenchy,

  The trick is to change policy without losing credibility and identity. This is not an exact science as we are all aware. Even the most accomplished statesmen and politicians sometimes zig when they should zag with disastrous consequences. Both the Catholic Church and the Society have thus far been very successful at doing this two-step

  Winston Churchill was once asked to name the chief qualification a politician should have. His reply: "It's the ability to foretell what will happen tomorrow, next month, and next year - and to explain afterward why it didn't happen."

  Perhaps one reason that the Catholic Church and WTBTS have thus far been capable of this two-step is because people so desperately want to believe someone can/will tell them what to do/believe/think.

  However, as people gain more education and comfort in their lives, they start to loose this need. Thus, the fall of percentage of converts to JW'ism in industrialized nations - and remarkable jumps of membership in Third World countries.

  It’s first and primary function is to exist. For this it must be prepared to sacrifice whatever is necessary. Against this ANYTHING may be justified and recorded history tells us that this has indeed been the case.

  Indeed, if lies must be told, then re-invent the definition of the word. If uneducated people follow better than educated, keep the followers ignorant as long as possible. If their own children/followers must be eaten, so be it. They were spiritually weak.

  waiting
• 

  Frenchy

  waiting
  I like ole' Winston's evaluation of politicians. So very true.
  Desperation can and does make fools of us all. And there is no shortage of those that are willing to take advantage of this.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  Pathofthorns

  It remains to be seen if we could survive after taking such a hit.

  I believe the religion will be around a long time. Sure at some point its likely to shed members, but as long as people feel there is "nowhere to go" many will stay where they are.

  Times have changed in that change actually (i believe anyway) keeps more members and makes the religion more attractive to prospective members in the long run, where as complacency in changing times leads to frustration.

  Much of the problem has to do with our past emphasis on chronology and the end coming "soon". At the present time, many are realizing that "soon" can be a very long time, and the "urgency" [read "fear"] of armageddon is being replaced by a fear of dying in this system with no finances for retirement years.

  Necessity dictates that many members, while still believing, have to cut back until the religion at least becomes more balanced and understanding toward the average person and what life in the system entails.

  I believe the society will change to the point that all of these "weak" ones will be considered "strong" simply due to a change in routine and viewpoint and outlook. If the religion can still exert its strong influence in the belief structure of individuals without taking up so much of their time, they will do alright.

  Many feel they have enough money to weather the storms of losses ahead. And money and a sucessful reinvention of themselves is what is needed to pull this off. That and a brilliant leader perhaps.

  If we were to see some long overdue major reform, I wonder how many of us who have left would reconsider and return?

  What is your answer to this? What would u do? Yeah, I know you'd love to throw on the pearls and strap on the "marry janes" and head off with a WT to your sunday meeting, but i don't think most would. Especially considering that open mindedness and acceptance and the end of shunning are major ingredients to reform, why would you go back if you were no longer "pressured" to.

  Its often the policies that need to be reformed that force people to desire to return. (ie. shunning) They don't want to lose their family, and if they've lost them, they could feel lonely and want them back. Take those policies away, and combine that with free flow of information regarding the organization's history, who will go back? What is there to go back to if everything that made it what it was no longer exists?

  However, to be unyielding once presented with incontrovertible evidence that you are wrong is also a means of losing a lot of members. So what does one do? Ah, ‘what tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.’

  I think times have changed in that people look more at intentions, and honesty, and are looking not so much for leaders that are consistently right, but for leaders that recognized the flock is human but has good hearts. They want to see more faith put in them, that they will weigh out matters and choose to do what is "right" and where the church wants to dictate matters and later is found to be in error, they want apology and accountablity.

  Path (in a "rambling" mood tonight :)