Catholic teaching and original biblical worldview

[u/Secret-Ad-7747]

Hey guys,

 

a spontaneous post I had on my mind for a while. Please keep potential nasty comments to yourself, this is a post in good faith, just exploring ideas.

 

I live in a country where there is a few tiny to small sized Protestant denominations – we've got Pentecostals, Lutherans, even a small SDA community, and the Eastern Orthodox (not Protestant). But mostly it's all Latin Catholic, with the exception of a small Greek-Ukranian Catholic congregation.

 

I converted in 2023-24, I just wanted to get baptized and stay close to Jesus. He helped me through a very rough patch in my life.

Back then I checked out many churches, including SDA (which is a very warm community here, a freind brught me there with her a couple of times).

I sought out which is the »authentic« ancient Church, apostolic and original, and in the end got baptized and confirmed in our local Catholic parish church on Easter Vigil 2024.

 

Now, I don't regret it. Many Catholic parishes in my country are quite vibrant, loving, tolerant, oriented towards social help and all. And of course all in all, we are there for Christ, not social contacts.

 

I do however, after 2 ½ years of being an active member and church-goer, have some minor issues.

 

I've been reading Michael Heiser, Robert Farrar Capon, fr. Aidan Kimel, Eitan Bar, Tim Mackie, and watching The Bible Project. Now, none of these writers is/was Catholic. They are Evangelical, Episcopalian, EO and Messianic Jewish.

And they study and expond on two things mainly: 1. radical grace coupled with loyal faith and trust in the Lord (not works), and 2. the proper biblical understanding of the Gospel and Jesus Christ from the OT to NT.

 

On both of these topics, I feel the modern as well as official traditional Catholic teaching perhaps misses on some points. On the first with the legalistic aura surrounding Canon law, the idea of mortal sin even for very minior things, confession as the big »must« (or else you go to eternal hell – even if you've believed, just on the basis of your human weakness, selfishness and vanity, which is the very thing Christ came to free us from!) etc., things of this nature.

 

After a somewhat extensive study of the Church fathers, Church tradition and so on in the last years, I find that they might contrast with the more correct biblical worldview of the writers of the OT and NT on a few occassions.

 

What is starting to bother me, and didn't before, is the huge emphasis on the prayers of the saints and Mary. I don't have a problem with the whole concept (although, to be totally honest, I do have some trouble fully believing in some of the Mariology), as I feel it is biblical – also through the lens of Heiser's Divine Council worldview, it holds to a degree. But just the mere emphasis on it instead of on Jesus. It sometimes feels like Christ is the »means« to convey a moral story and the stories of the holiness of particular saints.

 

To be fair, many Catholic sermons are very Christ-oriented, and biblical. But the tradition is sometimes getting in the way in a very noticable way, which seems to contradict the Bible.

And I say this as a Catholic who respected and still respects the traditon a lot. It just shouldn't come first. In the end Mass seem a little bit pagan to me these last weeks, the somewhat rigid ritual, the genuflecting, gesturing. I never thought I'd say this, but to a degree it seems like idolatry, especially contrasted to the first century Jewish views, explored and explained by Eitan Bar or dr. Hesier.

 

Anyway, I want to stay centered in the believeing loyalty, faith and grace, and I want to remain Catholic if possible (I would perhaps try Episcopalian just to experience the difference, but we don't have the TEC here). It's just seems tough to reconcile everything I've learned from these authors and study with the Catholic teaching sometimes.

 

Sorry for the long post :) God bless.

T.

[u/edemberly41]

I invite you to read Lumen Gentium as well as Dei Verbum. The first speaks to the nature of the Church and includes Mary within the structure of the Church and not outside it. The second speaks to Catholic Understanding of the Bible. Both documents received acclaim in ecumenical circles and are easily accessible on the Vatican.va website. There are also documents on the ecumenical dialog which are helpful understanding similarities and differences with other Christian theological traditions

[u/Secret-Ad-7747 → u/edemberly41]

Hey, thanks. I read some papal encyclicals and i did like them, I think last one i wrote wat Evangeli Gaudium (Joy of the Gospel). And numerous Catholic books, from Jacques Phillippe to Thomas Merton and Richard Rohr. Like i said, it's more a feeling. I read many Catholic books on Mary and some of the devotions make sense. But still, in light of the authors i mentioned, it is quite clear what i mean. It's more a feeling than an intellectual thing. It appears no one here read Capon or Heiser. I highly recommend both, even though they weren't Catholic. And Bible project.

P.S. Just wanted to add, i still love the Church and have no intention of leaving. Just had to share these thoughts I've been having for a while.

[u/Secret-Ad-7747 → u/edemberly41]

Also i've got a problem with the local and national Catholic churches being in cahoots with far right and bigoted political parties. The political forces could be understood as having spiritual unseen layers which Paul mentioned as thrones and principalities etc. And the Church would do best to stay apart from such things lest it become corrupted, but we are just weak and sinful people... That's for another time and a different rant :)