YID,
Catholics do not put things into black and white nearly as often as JWs, and not even as often as Evangelicals. Rather than things being "either this or that", much more often, their view is "both...and..." In this particular case, there is no rule that Catholic priests may not be married. In fact, any number of married Anglican/Episcopal or Orthodox priests who have become Catholics have subsequently been ordained as Catholic priests.
For the Catholic Church as a whole, the norm is to get married and have offspring. Catholics are not forbidden to marry in general; in fact, marriage is a sacrament just as holy orders is. Catholics are encouraged to marry. But some Catholics want to be priests, or "religious" (monks or nuns). The desire to enter these "holy orders" is viewed as out of the norm, a special gift from God, which includes the desire to serve God in the single state, as taught by Jesus and Paul. It is never a decision into which anyone is rushed. The process of becoming a priest or monk or nun takes years, and genuine deep commitment. Only after a long period of trial and examination is one finally accepted for holy orders.
Sometimes, however, in spite of the fact that someone has taken a vow of chastity and been ordained as a priest, a priest or monk later decides that he wants to marry. In that case, he must break his vow. He can no longer serve as a Catholic priest or monk. But it may be that the same person still wants to be a priest. He may decide to try to be ordained as an Episcopal or Anglican priest. In that case, if he meets the requirements for priests set up by the Episcopal bishops, he can become an Episcopal priests. Presumably, they might be accepted for the Orthodox priesthood as well, I do not know about that.
Tom
Tom Cabeen
JoinedPosts by Tom Cabeen
-
239
I Do Not Understand Why JWs Leave & Become Catholics!
by minimus inout of all religions, catholicism, to me, is wrong and clearly could never be the truth.
-
-
Tom Cabeen
-
239
I Do Not Understand Why JWs Leave & Become Catholics!
by minimus inout of all religions, catholicism, to me, is wrong and clearly could never be the truth.
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi Min,
You write: "Apostasies occurred from the beginning of the Christian congregation. The Roman church continued to propagate beliefs that were not from the inspired scriptures." Before the NT canon was finalized in the fourth century, by what standard would one decide that some teaching or practice was "scriptural"? The Old Testament?
You write: "I believe the trinity belief is incorrect, hence an example of apostasy." To what would you attribute the phenomenon that only groups like Jehovah's Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals and Unitarians have "seen through" this "apostate" teaching, whereas the vast majority of Christians historically have believed the teaching about the relationship of Father, Son and Holy Spirit that is currently taught by the Catholic church and most Protestant Christians. Do you think it is because none of them have ever read the Bible?
You say: "Forbidding men to marry, scripturally, is a sign of a false teaching." I would agree. That is why groups like the Albigensians were condemned by the Catholic Church. Surely you do not consider that the Catholic church's decision to select priests from among men who had already chosen to follow Jesus' and Paul's teaching of the superiority of the single state from the perspective of pursuing a career in ministry to be the same as "forbidding men to marry", do you? I would hope not, especially in view of the fact that no religious community holds marriage and family in higher regard than do Catholics.
Regarding popes, I agree that some of them have done shameful things, at least as shameful as Peter denying Christ three times, even after he had been warned about it in advance. Yet I still consider his letters to be inspired and free from error.
Tom -
239
I Do Not Understand Why JWs Leave & Become Catholics!
by minimus inout of all religions, catholicism, to me, is wrong and clearly could never be the truth.
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi Min,
Your statements raise some questions. Can you provide some clarification?
First, if the church as a whole "apostasized from the very beginning", on what basis could schisms recognized as such? Is not some main body of disciples, who share orthodox ("right teaching") beliefs presupposed, from which body schismatics separate themselves? What do you think of the possibility, based on, for example, what we find in Paul's letters to the Corinthians or the letters to the Asian congregations which form the opening chapters of the Revelation, that a worldwide community of believers could preserve "orthodoxy" (true teachings and practices) even if a significant number of its members failed miserably to live by those teachings and practices?
Second, if the meeting described in Acts 15 is counted as a "council," the second council identified historically was held in Nicea in 325, nearly three centuries after Pentecost. Do you see that council as having any legitimate authority to "deal with heretical beliefs"? I am using the word "heresy" to describe a "contrary opinion", a teaching that differs significantly from that held by the main body of Christians; for example, the idea that Jesus Christ was a created being with a beginning in time rather than a divine being begotten outside of time (Arianism).
According to biblical Bruce Metzger (in The Canon of the New Testament, its Origin, Development and Significance), "the process by which certain Christian writings gradually came to occupy a unique status of sacredness and authority in the Church" (pg 251) was a long process that occurred during at least three to four centuries. The NT canon was finally confirmed late in the fourth century.
As explained by Hillaire Belloc, (in Survivals and New Arrivals, pp 29-38), although the Jews accepted its authority, it was only on the authority of the Church (during approximately the same time three to four hundred year period) that the Old Testament came to take on the status of Sacred Scripture among the Gentiles nations, who had no other reason to consider the sacred writings of some small, insignificant people like the Jews (at least in the Roman view) as anything special.
So here is my third question: Assuming these respected scholars to be correct about their respective areas of expertise, is it possible that it was a completely corrupt and apostate Church was the same one who identified and preserved the Scriptures which now enjoy virtually universal acceptance by all Christians?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts on this.
Tom Cabeen -
24
A question about Crisis of Conscience
by seek2find inthe first time i read this book was an older copy in the mid 1990s.
that copy was burnt by a family member and i no longer have it.
in the newest version which i downloaded in pdf i'm having trouble finding a particular part.
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi S2F,
The reference you refer to is found on pages 329-335 of the first edition of Crisis of Conscience. It is the story of two JW elders from Ireland, Martin Merriman and John May. They came to the US to express their concern to the GB about the trend toward harshness they had observed. Both were promptly disfellowshipped (but very gently, not harshly!!)
The incident was excised before the third edition of the book was printed in April, 1999 for various reasons, one of which was to make room for other material Ray added as a response to things that appeared in WT publications after the publication of the first edition of CoC.
Tom Cabeen,
Publications Director,
Commentary Press -
39
Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV
by Nathan Natas inposted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .
in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.
posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hola caballero,
You can contact David at http://www.scrollpublishing.com/store/index.html. He and his wife live near Harrisburg, PA. They have an active ministry in Honduras, where they help people who need small business loans. You can read about it on their web site.
Su hermano,
Tom -
39
Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV
by Nathan Natas inposted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .
in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.
posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi Grace,
Well, Matt and I certainly talked many things over. But I don't think it was a case of either of us leading the other into the Catholic faith. We all (Gloria, too) were reading things separately, and thinking and praying. But of course we had lots of pretty heavy conversations. Ultimately I think we each came to the same conclusion sort of separately, but at about the same time. Matt was confirmed about two months before we were, but I was headed toward the Catholic church before he was.
You are right that there are Christians in all denominations. One thing that surprised me about Catholics is how non-judgmental they are, and accepting of those of other denominations. Maybe they used to be more judgmental before Vatican II, but I sure haven't seen it.
So nice to hear from you, Grace!
Tom -
39
Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV
by Nathan Natas inposted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .
in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.
posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi Min,
I hardly knew NHK. We had maybe two conversations. I very seriously doubt that he was gay, but he certainly talked about sex a lot at the head of the table. It was on his mind quite often. But maybe he felt he had to do that to keep a Bethel home full of young testosterone from going crazy. His wife Audrey was a very nice lady. Very classy, I thought. She remarried after NHK died.
I have heard rumors about the other two guys, but cannot confirm anything. I was in meetings with most all of them at one time or another, but the only GB members I really knew well were Ray Franz and Dan Sydlik.
Tom -
39
Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV
by Nathan Natas inposted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .
in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.
posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi Yannis, I did take a very close look at the Orthodox Church. I have a number of books and other materials published by various Orthodox writers. Since I became acquainted with the catholic faith by reading the ante-Nicene writings, I am quite comfortable with the Eastern approach to Christianity, including some aspects of Christians mysticism and spirituality. I really love the writings of the Eastern Fathers which I have read.
The Orthodox communions have completely valid apostolic succession, and for that reason the churches of the Eastern Rite (Orthodox) are viewed by the Latin Rite as the "other lung" of the great catholic church. There are a number of reasons why I did not become a member of the Orthodox Church, however.
The Orthodox church is divided up along national lines. And local parishes are the same way. The ones I have visited seem to be more like small ethnic communities than part of a great universal church that will evangelize all nations.
There also seems to be less consensus about some matters of teaching and practice represented by the respective heads of these national churches. One of these is how to view their Catholic brothers and sisters. Some are very open to communion, whereas others are quite opposed to it. But despite these comparatively minor differences, I deeply respect my Orthodox brothers and sisters.
There is also simple practicality. There are five Catholic parishes in our town. Ours is less than a mile from our home. The nearest Orthodox church is a Greek Orthodox Church several miles from here. There is a Syrian Orthodox Church about the same distance away in the other direction. I visited these parishes, and they are largely composed of members of a handful of families who came here from the old country and founded the local parish. But they put on wonderful ethnic festivals in the summertime, where we go to eat stuffed grape leaves and baklava. Yum!
There are other reasons, but this will serve to give you some idea as to why we chose as we did.
Tom -
39
Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV
by Nathan Natas inposted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .
in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.
posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hey Min,
"Juicy tidbits"? Whatever could you be talking about?
T -
39
Tom Cabeen to be interviewed on TV
by Nathan Natas inposted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm: .
in reply to: tom cabean to be interviewed on cable tv posted by jimwhitney on sat - may 3 - 5:25pm:.
posted by flatlander on sat - may 3 - 6:08pm: .
-
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi See,
Yes, I remember you and your husband. We met at my office, had dinner together and an enjoyable evening of talking.
Regarding the Journey Home program, if you have a reasonably fast Internet connection, you can see the program on EWTN live, at 8pm EST. (http://www.ewtn.com/journeyhome/index.asp)
I had much the same conditioning. As I have said before, I would probably never have investigated the Catholic Church if I had not been influenced by another former JW (David Bercot) to read the early Christian writings. He convinced me that the early church did not go off track immediately after the death of the apostles. My interest was piqued and I started reading the writings known as the Ante-Nicene Fathers. I was so enthralled by their explanations of Christianity, I really fell in love with it. Only much later did I find out how similar their teachings were to those of the Catholic Church. I couldn't NOT investigate further. That is the story in a nutshell.
And you cannot go wrong trusting in the Lord. But if you ask him for truth, he will give you what you ask for. You simply have to be ready to accept it. That is sometimes the hardest part.
Tom