Katholisch Leben!

Den katholischen Glauben kennen, leben, lieben & verteidigen!


Christian Heavy Metal

Posted on December 27, 2015 at 7:45 AM

Just saw part of a Stryper live video (a "Christian" Heavy Metal band). How come people in the audience make the sign of the devil during the show. To me this has nothing to do with Christianity. I love Hard and Heavy music, but Stryper to me are just an average Heavy Metal band. They could just as well sing out of the phone book. The lyrics just don't go along with the music and the "Christian message" (if there is any) to me does not look authentic at all.

I am tired of Ex-Catholics...

Posted on October 31, 2015 at 2:25 PM

I am tired of ex-Catholics who claim to know what the Catholic Church teaches because the spent some time in the Church or were baptized as a child. Aside the fact that few of them even have a basic knowledge of what the Catechism of the Catholic Church (along with all other Church documents) teaches [if you do, why did you leave Her at first place? A love that grows cold has never been a love to begin with!]. They usually join other (protestant/evangelical/charismatic - whatever) "churches" and of course believe that their personal understanding of the written Word of God is "biblical" and "godly" (isn't that idolatry - pretending to be God oneself and knowing it all?). Some have the "generosity" of granting other Christians the right to exist ("we basically all believe the same" or "spiritually we are all one church. It does not matter where you go to." - both of which are nonsense and "non-biblical"). Others do, but in the end they end up with having the truth just the same. In the end, all those other "churches" have holes in their theologies to climb through. I am glad I am Catholic, so I don't have to be Pope myself.

Bible Interpretation

Posted on February 2, 2015 at 2:05 PM

"It is raining cats and dogs!" - Just imagine someone writes that down and somebody else reads it 2000 years after that. The reactions might be: "Oh heck, those poor animals!" "You need to see that symbolically. Cats were symbols for the feminine and dogs for the masculine part in human beings!" ""That was a cultural thing. Cats and dogs were used to call for rain. That does not apply to us anymore." - Rings a bell? Same with the Written Word of God - the Bible. You need to understand what background the writers and those the writings were addressed to had, under what circumstances the texts were written and what the purpose was. For that we needthose in the Church who were annointed and who are in apostolic succession - along with those they gave authority to. Only then can we understand the true meaning of the Holy Scripture and trust its interpretation as being in line with what the authors had in mind!

Illegitimate Ordinations

Posted on February 1, 2015 at 8:20 AM

My dear evangelical brothers, some of you have the erroneous notion that they can somehow "strengthen" their pastorship by adding "apostolic succession". They dig out a some bishop in Brazil that went astray decades ago and have him lay handson them. Like this they believe they are standing right in the apostolic succession as well. This is very wrong. For apostolic succession, it is necessary to be annointed by a bishop - but the annointing also needs to be legitimate, else it is not valid!! Annointing and apostolic successions are not vodoo rituals that give you power and legitimacy. An annointing can neveer be separate from His Church! To do so would be a grave misunderstanding of what annointing and the offices of the deacon, priest and bishop are all about - WITHIN the Church!

Proof Texting

Posted on

One common practice among many "Bible churches", especially though in Church of Christ denominations seems to be "proof texting". You come up with an idea of your own and add a number of Bible verses (the more the better) to make it seem the Bible supports your theory. That looks like an undisputable statement at first, but more like rather poor theology at second sight. No serious Bible scholar or theologian would approach the Bible like that. There are a number of points to ponder if you want to do that.




The Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church for example states this:




"Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted with the help of the Holy Spirit and under the guidance of the Magisterium of the Church according to three criteria: 1) it must be read with attention to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture; 2) it must be read within the living Tradition of the Church; 3) it must be read with attention to the analogy of faith, that is, the inner harmony which exists among the truths of the faith themselves." (19)


(See also: https://aleteia.org/2020/06/28/how-do-catholics-interpret-the-bible/)


In the Catechism of the Catholic Church we read:


"According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.”The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs. – The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.– The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.– The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem. (CCC 115-117)"


Keep that in mind when you face more or less simplistic proof-texts that seem to more or less try to prove the author's opinion. You do not come up with an idea and then google Bible verses that seem to match your (!) point, take them completely out of context (especially referring the connection of Old and New Testament - the Old Testament is revealed in the New and the New hidden in the Old) and make them say whatever you want them to say. This is at best naive and poor, even though maybe well intended (if you have no theological background), at worst it is intentional - and dangerous beccause of that.


Likewise it makes no sense at all to try to show people who argue like that how wrong this approach is. You could contradict each one of their statements and they would probably stubbornly come up with new ones.


I am ever so glad I got out of this practice and started years of studies in theology in order to somewhat still my thirst for more.


Greetings from Munich, Germany,