Anyone close to converting to Catholicism?

[Roy5]

Find your faith, and put judging aside

Reading these postings confirms my feeling that people need to find a faith that provides them with hope and increases their love for God and one another. If this turns out to be Catholicism, fine. If Orthodoxy, fine.

I am a 'big tent' Protestant, respectful of all religions that enrich our lives with beauty and joy and fellowship. I cherish the freedom I have to wander around when it comes to theology, to examine everything, including the Bible, with an open mind. I reject any faith which claims that its interpretation of Christianity is the only truly valid one, that every other interpretation is lacking. Frankly, we're all lacking because our finite minds are so limited. In the world to come we all will be startled by the full truth that we cannot know or comprehend here.

Yesterday, I attended a Catholic church as I do from time to time. There is much in the mass and the congregation that I find appealing. However, I cannot honestly embrace doctrines or practices that I do not share. The notion that we consume the body and blood of Christ in communion (transubstantiation) misses me entirely, regardless of quotations from scripture. It simply is too 'pagan' for me. The teaching that Mary was the one person born without original sin troubles me because I don't believe in original sin - clearly an injustice that generation after generation should still be have to pay at birth for the sins of Adam and Eve (and I don't believe in Adam and Eve, of course, except as a helpful legend or valuable parable). Etc.

 As for Orthodoxy, I have attended various Orthodox churches here, in Greece, in Russia, etc., and it is interesting theater with impressive music, a worship pattern that certainly will appeal to some. Fine. But I need something which seems less a relic of past centuries. I love the simplicity and the less ritualistic liturgy that I find in Protestantism. The Quakers go a bit too far for me, but I admire them and their testimony for peace. I find peace and inspiration in a Presbyterian, Methodist, UCC etc service when there is good music and a thought-provoking, positive, intelligent and open-minded sermon, not telling us what to believe so much as helping us confront the daily challenges of life. I like my Bible classes but don't want worship to be another Bible class.   

  Many postings appeal back to the early church as though that should be our model. My own view, for what it is worth, is that the church needs to keep up with the world. This doesn't mean to conform to the contemporary world or the ancient world, but the church can remain faithful to its essential principles while still making changes to continue to be relevant. I remember a beloved sister-in-law who left the Catholic Church to become agnostic. Why? The church is not relevant to life today - that was her response. She went on to say that it simply taught too many things that her well-educated mind could no longer accept. Sadly, she abandoned the Christian church altogether.

   The main principles, of course, are loving God and one another. As for some practices, change needs to come. Take contraception. The Catholic Church condemns artificial contraception but in effect approves of 'natural contraception'. The goal of both is the same - to permit married couples to express and enjoy their love intimiately while limiting the number of children. Or, take divorce. The Church condemns divorce, but annulments are rampant. Say what you will, they are 'church-approved divorces'. All it does is permit the church to control the process. And we could go on.

   Back to my main point. Find the religous community that enriches your life. I'm convinced that God is too big to be contained adequately in only one religion and appreciates all sincere efforts to seek him out and serve him in humility and love. We should avoid pretending that my faith is better than yours, put our differences aside, and work together for a world filled with justice, unity, happiness and peace  Nothing would give Christ greater joy.

   God bless Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants - and, yes, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and all God's children. May religion become bridge instead of a barrier.

 

[josie_L]

I don’t think too much stress should be laid on a body being incorrupt or not as a proof of holiness (and indeed, the Church doesn’t).

When the Anglican Cathedral in Liverpool was doing building work which involved moving graves to make a park. one of the coffins fell off the truck and split open. Tthe body was in a preserved state, despite being a couple of centuries old. They later discovered that a chalybeate spring ran under the graveyard and had soaked the coffins. I’m afraid I don’t know what chemicals this spring contained, but googling ‘chalybeate’ would give you a scientific answer.

Incorruptibility is just one sign that a holy person was a saint.

p.s. Was it the only body to be preserved (it wouldn’t make sense to say it’s the chalybeate if the other bodies were decomposed).

 

[Bill_Pick]

Does the fact that Saint Anna was subject to concupiscence make any difference to Saint Mary?

Sin is not inherited. A propensity to sin is normal for human creatures.
If you read my history you would see I refer to her as the Holy Theotokos regularly.

She actually is Saint Mary of Nazareth you know, and she was not the Holy Theotokos until she became pregnant, so calling her by her first name in the context of her conception, birth and childhood should not be an issue.

BTW, did you ever see that old movie The Bells of Saint Mary’s? Great stuff

https://www.hotmoviesale.com/dvds/49215/1/The-Bells-Of-St-Marys.jpg

GREAT<GREAT movie and the one about the bad boys,great, FR. some thing, They dont make them like that any more

 

[josie_L]

If she was predestined to a special state of holiness beyond any other person, then her fiat was not a free choice and the rest of us have no hope of doing likewise. This seems to be the Latin position, based more or less on the notion of total depravity of the human condition. This notion seems to have begun with the convert Tertullian, and been more fully developed by a later convert called Augustine.

That should resonate with Calvinists.

But the western notion of a depraved state of humankind also compels the church to recognize that all non-Christians, non-baptized babies and aborted fetuses go to hell. This
is a horrific thought.

How would her choice not be free if she was born into original holiness just like Adam and Eve were (they had the free will to disobey God which they did, i.e., original sin, but Mary although immaculately conceived and endowed with free will like our first parents never disobeyed God)? You are making no sense. Furthermore, the latin position does not teach (the notion of) total depravity of the human condition but a wounded nature (nothing at all like what the Calvinists say) because Calvinists believe we have a slave enslaved will whereas the Church says we have a free will that although inclined to sin is still capable of good (being righteous). Here is what the CCC has to say:

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”.293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. **And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act. **

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

p.s. Limbo is not Hell so why are you saying that non-baptized babies and aborted fetuses go to hell? Moreover the church never obliged any Catholic to believe in limbo because it was never dogmatically declared by a pope or an ecumenical council.

 

[gglorybee2]

I have recently returned to the Catholic faith, coming home from a Assemblies of God church. I was Baptized Catholic when I married a Catholic man in 1967. I took classes, picked a sponsor, made my first Communion, etc. at that time. I’ve been absolved by my Priest from straying away from the Faith and am attending my local Parish Church. I am receiving the Eucharist with the blessing of my Priest. I am extremely happy to be back home! Now I am wondering if I will need to be confirmed?

 

[josie_L]

Find your faith, and put judging aside

Reading these postings confirms my feeling that people need to find a faith that provides them with hope and increases their love for God and one another. If this turns out to be Catholicism, fine. If Orthodoxy, fine.

I am a 'big tent' Protestant, respectful of all religions that enrich our lives with beauty and joy and fellowship. I cherish the freedom I have to wander around when it comes to theology, to examine everything, including the Bible, with an open mind. I reject any faith which claims that its interpretation of Christianity is the only truly valid one, that every other interpretation is lacking. Frankly, we're all lacking because our finite minds are so limited. In the world to come we all will be startled by the full truth that we cannot know or comprehend here.

Yesterday, I attended a Catholic church as I do from time to time. There is much in the mass and the congregation that I find appealing. However, I cannot honestly embrace doctrines or practices that I do not share. The notion that we consume the body and blood of Christ in communion (transubstantiation) misses me entirely, regardless of quotations from scripture. It simply is too 'pagan' for me. The teaching that Mary was the one person born without original sin troubles me because I don't believe in original sin - clearly an injustice that generation after generation should still be have to pay at birth for the sins of Adam and Eve (and I don't believe in Adam and Eve, of course, except as a helpful legend or valuable parable). Etc.

 As for Orthodoxy, I have attended various Orthodox churches here, in Greece, in Russia, etc., and it is interesting theater with impressive music, a worship pattern that certainly will appeal to some. Fine. But I need something which seems less a relic of past centuries. I love the simplicity and the less ritualistic liturgy that I find in Protestantism. The Quakers go a bit too far for me, but I admire them and their testimony for peace. I find peace and inspiration in a Presbyterian, Methodist, UCC etc service when there is good music and a thought-provoking, positive, intelligent and open-minded sermon, not telling us what to believe so much as helping us confront the daily challenges of life. I like my Bible classes but don't want worship to be another Bible class.   

  Many postings appeal back to the early church as though that should be our model. My own view, for what it is worth, is that the church needs to keep up with the world. This doesn't mean to conform to the contemporary world or the ancient world, but the church can remain faithful to its essential principles while still making changes to continue to be relevant. I remember a beloved sister-in-law who left the Catholic Church to become agnostic. Why? The church is not relevant to life today - that was her response. She went on to say that it simply taught too many things that her well-educated mind could no longer accept. Sadly, she abandoned the Christian church altogether.

   The main principles, of course, are loving God and one another. As for some practices, change needs to come. Take contraception. The Catholic Church condemns artificial contraception but in effect approves of 'natural contraception'. The goal of both is the same - to permit married couples to express and enjoy their love intimiately while limiting the number of children. Or, take divorce. The Church condemns divorce, but annulments are rampant. Say what you will, they are 'church-approved divorces'. All it does is permit the church to control the process. And we could go on.

   Back to my main point. Find the religous community that enriches your life. I'm convinced that God is too big to be contained adequately in only one religion and appreciates all sincere efforts to seek him out and serve him in humility and love. We should avoid pretending that my faith is better than yours, put our differences aside, and work together for a world filled with justice, unity, happiness and peace  Nothing would give Christ greater joy.

   God bless Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants - and, yes, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and all God's children. May religion become bridge instead of a barrier.

I am not all impressed by this happy clappy theology you express. And I have noticed that in almost all your posts you act very preachy.

 

[josie_L]

One has to recognize it as an analogy, as in representing a second chance for humanity.

 

[josie_L]

Sorry, meant to say we inherit orginal sin through (not by) our first parents. God bless.

 

[paperwight]

Incorruptibility is just one sign that a holy person was a saint.

p.s. Was it the only body to be preserved (it wouldn’t make sense to say it’s the chalybeate if the other bodies were decomposed).

I think there was more than one, but I have to say I was at the back of the group that was being shown round by a guide, and there was so much else of interest I didn’t pay too much attention.

I’d imagine that, out of respect, they’d leave the undamaged coffins intact and not open them to check, wouldn’t you, though?

 

[kristanl]

I have recently returned to the Catholic faith, coming home from a Assemblies of God church. I was Baptized Catholic when I married a Catholic man in 1967. I took classes, picked a sponsor, made my first Communion, etc. at that time. I’ve been absolved by my Priest from straying away from the Faith and am attending my local Parish Church. I am receiving the Eucharist with the blessing of my Priest. I am extremely happy to be back home! Now I am wondering if I will need to be confirmed?

To be in full communion with the church, you need to recieve four sacraments: baptism, communion, reconciliation, and confirmation. Confirmation is the last one usually given. But if you are planning on staying in the faith (which it sounds like, YAY!) then you should be confirmed You will enjoy it, it is very beautiful!

 

[Roy5]

Josie L

Sorry about the preachy part. Please overlook it and weigh the message which I want to pass along. As some others feel called to proclaim what they view as this or that particular spiritual truth, I simply try to do the same. My concern is for a spirit of unity and peace among all God's children. I'm sure that this appears naive to some, but I am convinced that it reflects the basic message of Christ, It must pain him to see his followers 'majoring in the minors' - debating complex issues of theology - when there is so much suffering and injustice in the world. Surely we can join in working together for the Kingdom.  

 God bless the whole world - no exceptions.

 

[josie_L]

Josie L

Sorry about the preachy part. Please overlook it and weigh the message which I want to pass along. As some others feel called to proclaim what they view as this or that particular spiritual truth, I simply try to do the same. My concern is for a spirit of unity and peace among all God's children. I'm sure that this appears naive to some, but I am convinced that it reflects the basic message of Christ, It must pain him to see his followers 'majoring in the minors' - debating complex issues of theology - when there is so much suffering and injustice in the world. Surely we can join in working together for the Kingdom.  

 God bless the whole world - no exceptions.

I believe in upholding the Truth and I believe in loving my neighbour, it is not an either/or situation. God bless. Jesus did not die for lies so I’m sure it must pain him when he sees people watering down his message to insignificance.

 

[Bill_Pick]

I have recently returned to the Catholic faith, coming home from a Assemblies of God church. I was Baptized Catholic when I married a Catholic man in 1967. I took classes, picked a sponsor, made my first Communion, etc. at that time. I’ve been absolved by my Priest from straying away from the Faith and am attending my local Parish Church. I am receiving the Eucharist with the blessing of my Priest. I am extremely happy to be back home! Now I am wondering if I will need to be confirmed?

WELCOME HOME ask you priest yes you need to be confirmed ,did they not tell you this in RCIA

 

[ferdie]

I don’t think too much stress should be laid on a body being incorrupt or not as a proof of holiness (and indeed, the Church doesn’t).

When the Anglican Cathedral in Liverpool was doing building work which involved moving graves to make a park. one of the coffins fell off the truck and split open. Tthe body was in a preserved state, despite being a couple of centuries old. They later discovered that a chalybeate spring ran under the graveyard and had soaked the coffins. I’m afraid I don’t know what chemicals this spring contained, but googling ‘chalybeate’ would give you a scientific answer.

You probably misinterpreted me on this. I didn’t mean it to say that incorruptibility is the ONLY proof of holiness. I did not even mean it to say that it is one of the sign of holiness. I did not call it a miracle (although it can be a miracle) but a phenomenon. I just find it** fascinating**, that’s all. So, no I did not put stress or too much stress about incorruptibility as a sign of holiness.
Have you smell a dead body before, specially a body that is not embalmed? In my experience, the stench of a dead human is the worst that I’ve smell before. St Bernadette was not embalmed and yet her body does not smell. She died in her room from bone cancer.

 

[ferdie]

I feel that I am very close to converting to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I recognize that the Free Methodist Church in which I grew up (a splinter from the Methodist Church, which was a splinter from the Anglican Church, which was a splinter from the Catholic Church) cannot lay claim to this title, for all its virtues. At best, I could claim that it is part of an invisible body of believers, or that certain members of it are, by virtue of their sincere confession of Christ as Lord. Having researched the Catholic Church and traditional Christianity as a whole for the past four years, I see that this invisible body was not what early Christians were thinking of when they spoke of the “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.”

In studying the Catholic Church, I had little initial difficulty with its doctrines. I could see that the Catholic teachings such as the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the communion of saints, the genuine saving power of baptism, and others had support in Tradition and in Scripture. I could see that the Protestant belief in sola scriptura was not in accordance with early Christian practice and was ultimately unworkable.

I had a vague acceptance of the dogmas of papal infallibility and the immaculate conception, as I had come to accept the God-ordained authority of the Church. I also had been mostly persuaded by the argument that these late definitions only came about because the pre-existing and long-standing beliefs of the Church were being challenged.

The trouble started when I encountered the Orthodox Church. Here was a church that did not believe in these new developments, and I could see no record of the Orthodox Church rejecting that which they had previously believed in this area. The contention that the Catholic Church had been making dogmas out of the opinions of theologians began to carry more weight with me.

This was difficult, because I had a great deal of admiration and respect for the Catholic Church. I loved its steadfast moral teachings, its medieval churches, its code of chivalry, and its beautiful music and liturgy. I had enormous respect for Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, and I was inspired by the short sections I read of their encyclicals and other writings.

However, I began to see this same beauty and wonder in the Orthodox Church, and my exposure to different liturgies and different churches showed me that, at least in my experience, this beauty and wonder was found to a far greater degree in Orthodoxy. Too many Catholic masses were too much like the Protestant services of my upbringing, while the Orthodox Divine Liturgy was always filled with a reverence that I had never before encountered.

I am in between right now. There are days when I am inclined to think that the Catholic Church is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and there are days that I think the Orthodox Church can lay claim to the title. There are also days when I just want to give up the search entirely, affirm the genuine Christian faith of people in both Churches, and continue attending a Protestant Church (preferably one that does not declare that members of other Christian bodies are on their way to Hell for their heresies). I am tempted to say, as has been said by others wiser than myself, that we are all schismatics. One way to look at this is to say that we, as sinners, have shattered Christian unity, and no one Church can lay claim to being “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.” We must all do the best we can, and hope and pray that God will have mercy on us for our errors.

In regard to the Catholic/Orthodox debate, I think that the Orthodox have the high ground in matters of doctrine, and I think that the Catholics have the high ground when it comes to moral issues and visible unity. In the area of doctrine, I think the apostles would find the Orthodox Church to be much more recognizable, and I think this says much. In the area of moral issues, however, I think the Catholic Church’s stance on contraception is very well argued, and their belief in the permanence of marriage is greatly to be admired. The apparent fact that the annulment system effectively nullifies this belief seems, in my opinion, to be a regrettable example of corruption and not a mark against the Church’s genuine teaching on the matter.

This is where I am. I do not wish to stay in this state of indecision. Some might suggest that I bloom where I am planted, but I feel that the soil of Protestant theology in which I grew up has long ago blown away. I appreciate your prayers and your advice. Thank you and may God bless you all!

I’ve been in your position before, and I know it is hard to be in the state of indecision. For a dull person like me, I need to follow an authoritative church, a church that is established from the times of the Apostles, visible and universal, and promised to last until the end of time. A church that I can find no matter where I go. A church that is infallible, for that church is the body of Christ. You have two choices. I’ll pray with you that you will soon find an answer. I my opinion, it doesn’t matter which of the two you choose, as long as you love God and you love your neighbor.

 

[Hesychios]

… Moreover, tradition as I understood it is not sure if Mother Mary died (we don’t even have her bones to venerate and you would think that something as important as the body of the Mother of God would have been lovingly protected by Christians). .

She very definitely did die.

http://www.melkite.org.au/images/users/2/ICONS/Icons of St. John Church/Dormition Of Our Lady.jpg

Even your bishop of Rome Pius XII agrees.

Mother Mary was born free of original sin (inherited by our first parents) because God chose her to be conceived immaculately (but she still retained free will to disobey him which she didn’t).

It doesn’t make any sense. You just said of Original Sin “it is not guilt but the consequences we inherit (a wounded nature)”.

And here we have a person who has died.

p.s. Do you think that Saint Catherine Laboure and Saint Bernadette were lying or seeing a false apparition of Mother Mary?

I think these people were confused.

 

[DD2007]

Just wondering if theres anyone that is interested in converting,…

Nope.

 

[josie_L]

She very definitely did die.

And how does this effect her being immaculately conceived (we believe through tradition she was assumed into Heaven body and soul). Can you give me the CFs that have written about her death (I think St. Chrysostom wrote something about it)?

It doesn’t make any sense. You just said of Original Sin “it is not guilt but the consequences we inherit (a wounded nature)”

.
We do not inherit the guilt as in we are not to blame for Adam’s sin, but because of his(original) sin we have inherited a wounded nature (concupiscence). Original sin is not an act but a state.

I think they were confused.

I think you’re confused if you can think that such simple hearted saints could miscontrue our Mother’s message (if by confused you mean it was a false apparition even worse) and yet bear so much fruit (by their fruits you shall know them).

 

[The_Iambic_Pen]

I’ve been in your position before, and I know it is hard to be in the state of indecision. For a dull person like me, I need to follow an authoritative church, a church that is established from the times of the Apostles, visible and universal, and promised to last until the end of time. A church that I can find no matter where I go. A church that is infallible, for that church is the body of Christ. You have two choices. I’ll pray with you that you will soon find an answer. I my opinion, it doesn’t matter which of the two you choose, as long as you love God and you love your neighbor.

The authoritative Church actually is appealing. The Catholic Church does seem to exercise this authority in a much more obvious manner than does the Orthodox Church.

I do hope to grow in love for God and for my neighbor. I believe that will ultimately matter more than which bishop I follow. Is Christ divided? Was Pope Benedict XVI crucified for me? Was I baptized in the name of Patriarch Bartholomew I? (1 Corinthians 1:13)

 

[Zundrah]

Nope.